Beneficial to his Church as the eating the body of the Passeover had been unto the Jews it should be all one to us as if we did eat of his very Body His speech may be rightly Paraphrased after this manner Whereas hitherto it hath been customary among people to feast upon the Dead Carcass of a dumb Animal in Token that they were in Covenant with God and were entitled to all the mercies of the Covenant And whereas the Lamb is a Type of me to the intent now that you and the rest of my followers may be assured that you shall have a certain interest in my Sacrifice and shall receive infinite blessings by my death though you are not to feed upon my very natural Flesh Lo instead and in the Room of that I appoint you to Feast after this manner and to look upon it as a feasting upon me and upon my Sacrificed body tho you do not eat of the very identical oblation as hath been usual hitherto and I would have you be satisfied that as often as ye shall eat this bread and drink this Cup ye shall be supposed interpreted and reckoned to participate of me my self Now this I call the Mystical partaking of Christs body and blood because by the celebration of this Mystery we are presumed and reputed to do so we do in effect partake of both by partaking of those things which do represent and are appointed to be taken in the place of both and we are as truly said to partake of our Sacrifice as the Jews were said to partake of theirs when they did eat of their very oblations This is the first and great blessing we receive 2. Hence we conclude in the second place that every Communicant who is rightly prepared and dispos'd hath hereby solid and substantial grounds for his hopes touching the Pardon of his Sins For since by this visible Pledge of Gods Love we gain an interest in the Sacrifice of Christs death since we are reckoned to participate of Christs Body and Blood since we are partakers of the Cross as the Jews were of the Altar it necessarily follows that we have all the Benefits of our Lords Passion and so that we ought to be assured of the Truth and sincerity of Gods promise that he will forgive and blor out all our miscarriages because it was for that end that Christ died But this will more evidently yet appear if we consider 1. The Correspondency of this Feast to the ancient Sacrifical Banquets in general 2. The Analogy of it to those Feasts which were used after Sin-offerings in particular And thirdly if we consider the words of our Saviour at the institution of this Rite 1. First then it is already proved that Gods ordering his people to Feast upon part of their Sacrifices was a sign and Token to them that they were in favour and Covenant with God that they had a Right unto all his promises that their Sacrifices were accepted Kindly and were Imputed unto such as had offered them By the visible Solemnity of Eating and drinking in Gods presence they were assured that now they were in a State of Reconciliation and Peace with him and had a Title to all those mercies which their Sacrifices were intended for Seeing therefore that this Feast is answerable unto those it argues plainly that as the Eating of Sacrifical Feasts was an Evidence unto the Jews that they were benefitted by the oblations and were in Gods Favour so the partaking of this Sacrifical Feast is an evidence unto us Christians that we are Benefitted by Christs Oblation of himself and are in Favour with God also and consequently that we have a Right to his Promise that he will Forgive and Pardon us that being a main part of Gods Covenant one of his Principal Promises an Eminent Blessing and such a Singular Expression of his Favour as every Soul of man is Highly concern'd most earnestly to Hunger and Thirst after 2. But for the further confirmation of this matter we are to note that this is not a Feast upon a Sacrifice at large but a Feast upon a Sacrifice for Sin in Particular you must remember that there were certain Oblations appointed by the Law which were called Sin offerings and Trespass-offerings because they were intended to make an Atonement for all iniquities whatsoever both of the Heart and of the Hand whether they were offences against the First or against the Second Table Of these Sacrifices the People of the Jews were never suffered to eat no nor the Priests themselves sometimes as when it was a whole burnt offering or a Sacrifice of Expiation that was to be burnt without the Camp wich was a Lively Type of Christ wo was Sacrificed without the City Nevertheless these Sacrifices were attended with Other sorts of Oblations which the People were allowed to eat of and their eating thereof was a Pledge and Assurance to them that their Atonement was now made and their Pardon given Why now Christ was made Sin for us that is he was made a Sacrifice for our sins though be knew no Sin And as he was our Sin offering so our eating at the Holy Table is a Token and Argument to us that God is at Peace which us and that our Atonement is made for all our iniquities trangressions and sins Nay we have a far greater Priviledge in this respect than the People of the Jews had for they were not permitted to eat the the flesh of a Sin-offering but we are that is we are permitted to eat of Bread instead of it They were never allowed to Drink the Bloud of any of their Sacrifices but we are that is we are allowed to drink wine instead of Christs Bloud These a Nova est hujus Sacramenti doctrina Scholae Evangelicae hoc primum magisterium protulerunt doctore Christo primùm haec mundo innotuit disciplina ut biberent Sanguinem Christiani c. Autor Serm de Caena Dom. Cipriano ascript are Singular Priviledges to us and so they are Greater Assurances also of our Pardon and Atonement Christ gives us his Body and Bloud too for our plenary Conviction and Consolation touching the Remission of our Sins In this respect our Christian Feast doth far out go all those which they used under the Law For they could participate but of some of their Sacrifices and but of Part of them too we participate even of our Propitiatory Sacrifice nay of our whole propitiation Whereas the Bloud of every Sacrifice was wont to be poured out at the Altar and not so much as one Drop of it was to be tasted of either by the Poeple or Priests behold saith our Saviour to his Disciples you have liberty to participate even of the Bloud of my Sacrifice as this Bread is in the Room of my Body so is this Wine in the place of my Heart Bloud and I give you this particular command and Priviledge that ye Drink of it every one of you
Which a little before he calls five several times Bread and the Bread of Lord. Origen in Matth. cap. 15. Sacramental Bread though Bellarmine doth onely trifle upon the Argument interpreting it of the Corruption of the Species or Accidents onely that is of Nothing or of things without matter and Substance which is as good as nothing The truth is the Learned Jesuite was not able to answer this objection and therefore Bellarm. de Euch lib. 1. cap. 14. he tells men that they should stop their ears at it and say nothing to it But let them endeavour to Shuttle it off what they can it is a most Horrid Conclusion which followeth their Principle of Transubstantiation which renders the Principle it self highly wicked and Blasphemous as well as Unreasonable 3. But yet did the Holy Scriptures say expresly that what we taste and see at the Lords Table is the very natural Flesh and Bloud of Christ we ought rather to disbelieve our senses and reason too than contradict the Word of God But they speak nothing to this purpose but do plainly say and argue the contrary and this is the third thing which we justly blame the Romanists for that they will not suffer the Scripture to determine the point between us though it be a Book which They acknowledge as well as We to contain the Word of God and which one would think should be judged a certain Rule of Faith and of sufficient authority to oblige every Christians Judgement to Acquiesce by Now 1. as touching the Body of Christ the Scripture tells us that it is gone up into Heaven there to abide till the day of final Judgement To this purpose S. John tells us chap. 14. and 16. that Christ spake to his Disciples before his death telling them that he was about to leave them and to depart from them that he was going his way to the Father and was leaving the world Which expressions must necessarily be understood of his Bodily absence that his Humane Nature was to be no longer here below or else the sense would be Impertinent and to no purpose For his design was to Prepare the minds of his followers that they might not be dejected at his departure nor surprized with it And to that end he told them of it before hand and assured them withal that in lieu of his Corporal presence he would give them his Spirit to be with his Church to the end of the world Now to what purpose were these Expressions and Promises if he was to be with them still in Person and if his Body was to be handled by them still at the Sacrament The Poor said he ye have with you always but Me ye have not always Matth. 26. 11. This is contradicted by those of the Church of Rome for they say we have him with us still even in his person though he be not visible to our eyes nay they pretend to have him much better than the Jews had for they saw him and heard him and touched him only but these pretend to eat him too and to take him down into their very Stomachs And S. Peter speaking of him affirmed that he was in Heaven and there was to be until the times of Restitution Act. 3. 21. In respect of his Body he is at the right hand of God in Heaven and thence we look for him saith S. Paul Phil. 3. 20. not in the Sacrament on the Patin or in the Chalice but we look for him from Heaven at the general Resurrection Lord what can a man in his wits collect out of all these Texts but this that though Christ be with us by his Spirit yet he is at such an infinite distance from us in his Humane nature that till the end of all things we cannot have so much as a Glimpse of him unless Heaven be opened to us by a Miracle as it was to S. Stephen Men were as good take the Holy Writers by the Throats and with violent hands keep them from speaking at all as dispute against such plain and Full Evidence touching the absence of our Saviours Natural Body And then secondly as touching that which we take into our hands at the Sacrament the Scripture still calleth it Bread and Wine At the institution our Lord pointed to the contents in the Cup and termed it the fruit of the Vine And so he is said to have taken Bread to have blessed it to have broken it and to have given it to his Disciples requiring them to eat it meaning plainly that which he took into his hands and that was Bread S. Luke calls the Distribution of the Sacrament the breaking of Bread Act. 2. 42. And S. Paul says 't is Bread which we break 1 Cor. 10. 16. that we are Partakers of Bread vers 17. and that as often as we eat of it we eat of Bread 1 Cor. 11. 26. whence it appears that 't is Bread after Consecration as well as before though the Use and Condition of it be changed so that by it the Body of Christ be communicated to us yet the Nature and Substance of it is the same still even Bread as the Scripture calls For 't is an eternal truth that where things are of a Different Nature as bread and flesh are the one cannot be said to be the other with any Propriety of speech as Bertram rightly argued that nothing is more absurd than to call Bertran de Corp. Sang. Dom. bread flesh or wine bloud without a Figure for 't is as absurd as to call a Man an Elephant or a Fish a Scorpion Either then it is not Bread and then the Scripture deceives us or if it be Bread it is not Christs Natural Flesh and then the Church of Rome cousens us and there is the point The utmost that they can pretend from Scripture is that one expression this is my Body and will you not say they believe our Saviour himself Yes we do firmly believe that to be true which our Saviour did mean but the question is what his meaning was Now that those words are not to be taken strictly and according to the first Sound of them will be clear from these following considerations 1. That before men grew Hot and Angry and Magisterial about this matter several Doctors even of the Roman Church could not find that our Saviour meant any thing of Transubstantiation by that Phrase That Doctrine was defined first at the Lateran Council a little above 400. years ago and yet Scotus and Cameracensis who lived after that Council did hold that without the Churches Declaration there is no place of Scripture which forceth men to believe Transubstantiation Nay Bellarmine himself confesseth the thing to be Probable enough which those Bellarm. de Euch. lib. 3. c. 23. Doctors said and by this 't is manifest that in their own opinion Christs words may be allowed to bear a very doubtful sense so that had it not been out of pure respects to the
9. by a wilde Beast or which dyed of it self nay that they were so very Nice in these times that they would not eat any thing not so much as a Sausage that was mixt with Bloud Now to argue hence Can it be credible in the least that they would have made such Apologies for themselves had they believed that they did constantly eat of Christs Natural Flesh and drink of his Natural Bloud in the Sacrament With what faces could they then have pleaded as they did What an Argument would they have given the Heathens against Christianity How soon would the Pagans have given them the Lye What Hypocrites would they have been rendred in pretending that they durst not taste of the flesh and bloud of men no not of Cattle neither if all the while they were Conscious to themselves and were perswaded that they fed daily upon the Flesh and Bloud of Jesus Nor was it possible Tertulian ubi Super. Athenagor leg pro Christianis p. 39. for them to have concealed this matter because the Heathen Inquisitors every day apprehended their Servants who for fear of Torments and Death discover'd the Secrets of their Religion and they would certainly have discovered this too had they been taught by their Pastours that Christs Flesh and Bloud were received at the Sacrament after a Corporal manner And to this purpose serves that memorable and apposite Story of the Confession that was made by Sanctus and Blandina at their Martyrdome in the early times of Christianity The Story is related by Ireneus and though it be not to be found in those Works of his that are extant yet it stands upon record in the Comments of Oecumenius upon S. Peter and Albertinus and others have taken particular notice of it because it is a most evident Testimony in this case The Greeks saith this Author having apprehended Albertin de Euchar. l. 2. c. 3. some Servants that did belong to the Christian Catechumeni and endeavouring by force to understand from them some of the secrets of the Christians those Servants had nothing to tell so as to gratify their Tormentors but this that they had heard their Masters say how that the Divine Communion was the Bloud and and Body of Christ they supposing the meaning to be that it was properly bloud and flesh The Pagans upon this taking it for granted that the Christians celebrated such barbarous Mysteries divulged it presently among the rest of the Greeks and by tortures compelled Sanctus and Blandina the Martyrs to confess the truth Hereupon Blandina presently dealt freely with them and said How can Christians endure the thoughts of doing this the eating of the flesh and drinking of the bloud of Christ seeing that for exercise or Discipline-sake they Refrain from several sorts of flesh that are Lawful to be eaten Now several things are observable from this Relation First that this suggestion was originally grounded upon Hear-say Secondly that these Servants did belong to such Christians as were meer Novices in the faith Candidates as yet for Baptism not instructed well in the nature and meaning of this other Sacrament Thirdly that they did utterly mistake too the sense of their Masters and perhaps were willing to tell a fable for their own Security sake Fourthly that what the Pagans concluded hence was a perfect Calumny and an Unjust charge against the Christian Church And to make this evident to all the World Fifthly the Holy Martyrs argue from a custome that many Christians then had of abstaining from ordinary flesh-meats when they were not bound to such abstinance by any Law of Christ so that 't was impossible for them to conceive that they did eat of the very Flesh of their Saviour much less that they should be so Barbarous as to drink his Bloud in the Sacrament This therefore is enough to make it clear that the old Christians in the Apostolical and most Primitive times did not so much as Dream of the Doctrine of Transubstantiation and 't is a most Ridiculous thing for any man to think otherwise 2. It is observable that the Ancients were wont to prove the Truth of our Lords Incarnation from this known and receiv'd principle because the Bread and the Wine at the Sacrament were Tokens and Representations the one of his Body the other of his Bloud Some Hereticks there were of old who would not own that Christ took indeed Humane flesh of the Holy Virgin nor that he really suffered or rose again but they taught their Disciples that all this was nothing but a Shew and Phantasm This Heresie was broached in the days of the Apostles 1 Jo. 4. 3. 2 Jo. 7. and was afterwards propagated in a great many places by that Arch. Heretick Simon the Sorcerer and by Saturninus Basilides Valentinus Marcion and divers more Now against these Hereticks the Catholick Doctors Ignat. Ep. argued from a known Principle of Christianity viz. that the Bread and Wine in the Eucharist were Sacraments Figures and Representations of Christs Body and Bloud This was Tertullians Argument Panis Calicis Sacramento jam in Evangelio prebavimus Corporis Sanguinis Dominici veritatem adversus Phat asma Marcionis Tertull. ad Marc. l. 5. that when Christ took and distributed Bread among his Disciples he made it his Body by saying This is my Body that is the Figure of his Body said Tertullian And hence he concluded that our Lord had indeed a true and real Body because the bread was a Figure of Corpus sum insuistum panem distributum fecit hoc est corpus meum dicendo id est Figura Corporis mei Figura autem non fuisset nisi veritatis esset corpus Caeterum vacua res quod est Phantasma figuram capere non posset Tertull. adv Marcion lib. 4. where note that he calls it Bread when it was distributed after Consecration it For a shadow must be the shadow of some Substance and an Image must be supposed to represent something that is Real In like manner Origen grounded an Argument against those Hereticks upon those words of S. Paul that the Bread and Cup of blessing is the Communication of Christs Body and Bloud whereupon he askes the Question that if Christ was as Quod si ut obloquuntur isti carne distitutus er at exanguis cujusmodi carnis cujus corporis qualis tandem Sanguinis Signa Imagines panem poculum ministravit Origen Dial. 3. where note again that Origen called it Bread when it was administred they said destitute of flesh and bloud of what flesh of what Body of what bloud was that Bread and Cup the Signes and Images which Christ administred Some of those Hereticks foresaw the strength of this Argument and therefore that they might not Confute their own Principle by their Practice that they might not seem to grant the Reality of Christs Humane Body by receiving the Symbol and Sign of it we are told by
Body of Christ that is doth it not work this in Us that our bodies participate of the Immortality and glory of our Head This is the meaning saith he that the participation of the Bread and Cup of the Lord hath this effect that our souls and Bodies are thereby made conformable and Like to the soul and Body of our Redeemer We eat Id. in 1. ad Cor. cap. 11. and drink even to the participation of Christs Spirit so that we are the members of his Body and are enlivened by his Spirit Indeed Anselm was but a late Writer in comparison for he lived in the 11th Century But in this he spake the sense of the Ancient Doctors of the Catholick Church whose faith it was that Christs Humane nature by being united to the Deity hath a Quickning faculty so that all true believers do receive Quickning Virtues from him specially by a due use of the blessed Eucharist That this was the Catholick faith appears by one pregnant instance which hath not been taken notice of by many Writers upon this Subject A little above 400 years after our Saviour Nestorius the Heretick taught that the Divinity and Humanity of our Lord was not united in one person Upon this a General Council met at Ephesus and unanimously condemned this Heresie S. Cyril of Alexandria was a great man at the Council and had a great hand in the condemnation of Nestorius and one Reason he gave to justifie their proceedings was this because Nestorius by that his Doctrine made void the Virtue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Ephes of the Sacrament And how did they conclude so why this was the principle of S. Cyril and the rest of them that the Body of Christ is Vivifick and that the Souls of Communicants live by receiving Vital Virtue from it Now if as Nestorius said the Divinity and Humanity of Christ be not United it is impossible for his Flesh to yield any Life because no flesh quickneth of it self neither can Christs flesh Quicken but by the power of the Word Seeing therefore that Heretick denyed the Union between the Word and the Flesh of Christ it would follow of necessity that the Body of Christ is not vivifick and consequently that we receive no vital virtue from it at the Sacrament which Doctrine being contrary to the Common Faith the Author of it Nestorius and his followers were very justly Anathematiz'd Whosoever reads the History of that Council with indifferency of judgement may easily perceive that the sence of the Church at that time was that at the Holy Communion men receive Divine and heavenly Virtues from our Saviours glorified Humanity so that we live by Him through the Communication of his Virtues as he himself lived by the Father through the Communication of his Nature And I am sufficiently satisfied that this was the faith of the Catholick Church both before that Councel and also for many ages after it Thus when St. Ignatius intimates that the Eucharist is the Flesh of Christ 't is clear to me that he meant Christs spiritual Flesh as Clemens Alexandrinus and St. Jerome expresly called it meaning the Spiritual Virtue of his flesh by reason of its Hypostatical Union with the Deity When Ireneus said that the Eucharist consisteth of two things the Earthly and the Heavenly thing 't is plain that by the Heavenly thing he meant not Christs solid Natural Body but that Heavenly Grace and Virtue which goeth along with the Sacrament When Justin Martyr compared the Mystery of the Eucharist with the Mystery of the Incarnation I cannot doubt but he meant that as in the one there was a Personal union between Humanity and Divinity so in the other there is a Sacramental Union between Bread and Spirit when the Pseudo Dionysius affirms De Eccl. Hier. c. 3. that by the Sacrament we Communicate of the Divine things of Christ 't is but fair to understand him to speak of those Divine Virtues and influences wherewith the Holy Jesus doth bless every humble and devout heart When Clemens Alexandrinus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clem. Alex. Paedag. lib. 2. c. 2. distinguisheth the spiritual Blood of Christ from that which is fleshly and moreover saith that by drinking the bloud of Jesus is meant the being made partaker of the Lords Incorruption any man may see that he spake of the Spiritual Virtues of Christs Blood whereby we are purified sanctified and fitted for a blessed Immortality When Theodotus affirmed that by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 leg 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodot in fine oper Clem. Alex. pag. 800. the power of the Spirit the Bread is changed into a spiritual virtue his plain meaning was that there is a change not of the substance but of the quality of the Bread so that by the manducation thereof spiritual Virtue is given to the worthy Receiver When Origen speaking of the Bread calls it the Typycal and Symbolical Body of Christ or the figure and Type In Matth. 15. of it and then presently mentions by way of distinction the Word it self which was made flesh and is the true food which whosoever eateth shall live for ever it is most reasonable to understand him to speak of that vital and Divine virtue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cyril Catech. m yst-8 which goes along with the symbol and is derived from the Word which is the suitable food of the Soul as bread is of the Body When Athanasius understands by the flesh of Athanas in illud quicunque dixerit verbum c. Christ that Heavenly food from above that spiritual Alimony which Christ gives us from Heaven what else could he mean but those Divine and Caelestial Virtues whereby he strengthneth and refresheth every craving Soul tho in the substance of his Natural body he be absent from us When according to Julius Fermicus Ipse ut Majestatis suae substantiam credentibus tradens ait nisi edevitis carnem filiis hominis c. Jul. Firmic de Errore Profan Gent. in Bibliotheca Patrum the receiving the substance of Christs Majesty is the very same thing with the eating of his flesh and the drinking of his Blood what can he mean by the substance of Christs Majesty but those substantial and Divine influences which come from his Throne of Glory whereby we are made partakers of the Divine Nature as St. Peter Si ergo nos naturaliter secundum carnem per eum vivimus id est Naturam carnis suae adepti c. Hilar. de Trin. lib. 8. speaks or as St. Hilary expresseth it whereby we are made partakers of the Nature of his Flesh glorified when St. Cyril of Jerusalem saith of the Bread as he did of the Oyntment which was used in those days that after St. Cyril Cateeh 3. Invocation it is not any common or inconsiderable thing but the gift of Christ and of the Holy Spirit made efficacious by the presence of his God-head how
and therefore St. Paul calls it the Annunciation the Declaration or the shewing forth of the Lords death 1 Cor. 11. 26. alluding manifestly to the Haggadah at the Jewish Passeover By this that has been spoken it doth plainly appear that this Holy Solemnity is Analogous and answerable to those Religious Feasts which were used of old and especially to the Paschal Feast which observation will help us not only to understand fully the purport of this Mystery but also to baffle the pretences of those Monsters of Hereticks the Socinians who give a very mean and contemptuous account of the Lords Supper For they take no notice of any strict engagements it lays upon us to an Holy Life they believe not the Sacrament to be a Seal of Gods favour and Grace so far are they from owning this that Socinus had the confidence Multo praestantior sine dubio respectu veteris faederis fuit sanguis ille pecudum quam respectu novi sit panis ille vinum Socin ad Epist Niemojevii to say that the blood of Beasts under the Law was of Greater efficacy and value than the Bread and Wine in this Ordinance They utterly deny that we hereby Receive any thing at the hands of God nor will they indure us to say that Gods Spirit is here given or that our Faith is here increased or that pardon of sin is here tendered or that we receive here any Pledge of a blessed Resurrection and a glorious Immortality No they explode all doctrines of this nature and teach Is finis est vitûs istius usurpandi ut beneficium a Christo nobis praestitum commemoremus seu Annunciemus nec ullus alius Cat. Eccles. Pol. that the proper end for which the Lords Supper was instituted is this that we may Commemorate the Lords Passion Nay Socinus was of opinion In caena Domini ne ipsam quidem mentionem Christi corporis pro nobis traditi sanguinis fusi disertis verbis faciendam necessariam plane esse Socin de usu fine Caenae Dom. that 't is not necessary so much as to make express mention of Christs Body being delivered or of his blood being poured out for us which yet is inconsistent with his own Principle for how can we Commemorate the Death of our Blessed Saviour without making mention of it Briefly these Blasphemous Hereticks look upon this Holy Ordinance only as the memorial Vide Excerpta ex ore Socini in fine disputationis de usu fine caenae Domini of a Friends kindness This is all they will allow and so they conclude that we may Celebrate it either sitting or standing or with our Heads covered or with Water if we will instead of Wine but to kneel or so much as to sigh with eyes lifted up at the Celebration is in their account a kind of Idolatry I confess these ill conclusions do for the most part follow from that unsound Principle that the Supper of the Lord was intended only in Commemoration of him But what reason and ground have they for this Principle Why Non ullus alius praeter hunc a Christo est indicatus finis Cat. Eccl. Pol. because say they at the institution Christ mentioned only this end Do this in remembrance of me But this is not a reason and ground sufficient For the mentioning of one end is not the excluding of others though Christ in express terms had said no more yet it doth not follow that no more was intended The very Analogy which this Feast beareth to other the like Sacrifical Feasts of old and especially to the Paschal Feast is enough to shew us the several Ends of it had our Saviour mentioned no end at all And this is the Reason that I have now taken notice of that Analogy For if such Feasts were commonly reputed to be Covenant-Rites between God and Man then we may reasonably believe that this is to be reputed so too If to eat the body of a roasted Lamb was a Pledge of Gods favour to the Jews then we may infer that to eat Bread instead of Christs body is a pledge of Gods favour to us Christians If the use of other Sacrifical Feasts did entitle the partakers to all those Benefits for which the Sacrifices were offered then we may conclude that the use of this Sacrifical Feast doth entitle the Communicants to all those benefits for which Christ our Sacrifice offered up himself and which he purchased for us Therefore the Socinians do but trifle and are very vain in pretending to teach us the full meaning of this Rite when they take no notice of that correspondence and Analogy which is between this and other ancient Rites of the like nature For this is a principal thing to be taken notice of and we cannot easily conceive what else it was which satisfied the Apostles touching the purport of this Ordinance when it was instituted first For that they presently discerned the meaning of it is clear because we do not find that they desired of our Lord any explanation at all of this mystery In other cases they were very inquisitive and sometimes about matters which we think had little need of explication being obvious to Men of common and ordinary capacities And yet at the institution of this Holy Sacrament tho it containeth some things so difficult and dark to us that they have occasioned Quarrels in all parts of the Christian world yet the Disciples were who ly silent being very sensible what such Sacred Feasts did mean in those days and what the general sense of Mankind was about them They could not but know that by eating of things which bad been offered at the Altar men undertook to observe that Religion to which that sacred Rite did belong and whereof it was a part They could not but know that by such an action they had a right to those benefits which the Sacrifice had been offered up for and so they became very nearly related to God as his Favourites and Family And when they found by our Saviouts discourse that he would offer up himself a Sacrifice for them and heard him now say of the bread in his hands this is my Body they might easily apprehend him to mean that they were to eat of Bread in the Place and Room of his flesh and instead of feeding upon his Natural Body Considering that the Lamb which was drest for the Paschal-Supper was usually called the Body of the Passeover no sooner did Christ call the Loaf His Body but they did instantly conceive it was appointed to be eaten for his Body and in liew of it especially since he had told them before that they were not to feed on him as they were wont to feed upon the Lamb after a carnal and cross manner because the Flesh profiteth nothing Joh. 6. 63. Hence they saw presently that this institution did very much resemble the Sacrifical Banquets which had been observed of old only it was
recte est redditum Armachan not in Ignat. Ep. ad Magnes Num. 42. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Or Altar-place because it is there or should be there before the Lords Table that we present to the Divine Majesty of God all our Christian Sacrifices and perform the Offertory as I shall hereafter shew at large that all Christians were wont to do in the Primitive and Apostolical times of the Church But to call the Sacrament a Sacrifice or the Holy Table an Alter upon presumption that Christ is really Sacrificed and in his Natural Body offered up there is a Solaecism in Divinity and that which is utterly against the sense of the Ancient Doctors of the Christian Church For though in many Liturgies and other Ancient Books we often find mention to be made of Oblations and Sacrifices at the Celebration of the Holy Sacrament yet this is meant of those sacrifices and Offerings which I have now spoken of and which all Reformed Churches allow of and particularly the Ancients point to those Liberal Gifts which Christians in those times brought with them to the Church to be presented and offered up to God on the Holy Table as an humble acknowledgement that the whole Earth was the Lords and as a Grateful Recognition of his Right to all of his Dominion over all and of his propriety in all the possessions they did enjoy To this purpose I shall note a passage or two out of that very ancient Writer Irenaeus Oblations in general are not forbidden us says he there 1. 4 c. 34. are oblations under the Law and there are Oblations under the Gospel there were Sacrifices among the Jews and there are Sacrifices in the Church And again Our Lord incouraging his Disciples to offer unto God the first Fruits of his Creatures not for that God hath any 1. 4. c. 32. in fine need thereof but that they might shew themselves neither unfruitful nor unthankful he took that Bread which was made of his Creatures and gave thanks saying this is my body and he likewise acknowledged the Cup consisting of the Creature which we use to be his Blood and thus he taught the New Oblation of the new Testament which the Church receiving from the Apostles offers throughtout the world unto God And elsewhere speaking of the same thing c. 34. in initio he saith that the Oblation of the Church which our Lord taught and appointed to be offered through all the World is accounted a pure Sacrifice with God If any of the Fathers have spoken as if Christ was offered up in the Holy Sacrament they are to be understood as speaking figuratively and improperly because the Signs and Symbols of Christs Body and Blood are presented upon the Table Their meaning was and they said so when they spake strictly and distinctly that they offered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb dem Evang 1. I. c. 10. a Memorial instead of a Sacrifice as Eusebius said And to instance in no more nothing can be more plain then what S. Chrysostome hath said upon this subject viz. That though we offer every day yet we do but make a Commemoration of Christs Death that this that is done now is in Remembrance of that which was done before Hom. 17. in Heb. that we offer not another nor a different Sacrifice as the Jewish High Priest did but still one and the same or rather saith he we perform the Remembrance of a Sacrifice which is the very same that Justin Dial. cum Tryph. pag. 260. Martyr affirmed of our using the Bread in the Sacrament that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Memory of that Passion which Christ was pleased to undergo for us Men and for our salvation I have noted all this to shew how grosly the Romanists are deceived in that which many poor wretches among them take to be a main part of Religion tho I am afraid their Crafty Guides tell them so for their own Interest and Advantage For do but take away the Doctrine of Christ being really Sacrificed under the species of Bread and Wine and their Masses for Quick and Dead must go away next then the Doctrine of Purgatory must down too then the Practice of praying for souls supposed to be in Torments there must down also and then the conceit of Absolutions and Indulgences and divers other Lucrative Arts whereby the Knavish Priests cheat ignorant and Easie People out of their Mony till in the end by taking away first one shore and then another the old rotten House drops down upon their Heads which hath been held up hitherto by this Artificial Prop among others that our blessed Saviour is Really and Truly offered up a Sacrifice for all men in this Mystery whereas indeed it is not a Sacrificing of him but a Representation and memorial of the great Sacrifice upon the Cross 2. That which I would note in the second place is that this Blessed Sacrament was intended to be not a Memorial of the Passeover-Supper which Christ Celebrated the same Night that he was betray'd but a Commemoration of his Passion and Death on the day following This indeed is very obvious and easie to be observed And yet for want of minding this thing well many weak people among our selves have been unfortunately lead aside into wrong and superstitious conceits about some Circumstances which relate to this solemnity Because the Passeover was eaten at Night therefore some conclude that this Sacrament ought not to be solemniz'd at any other time And because our Saviour and his Disciples did as they suppose eat the Passeover Sitting therefore these men infer that it is not lawful for us to receive this Sacrament in a Kneeling posture They would have us to be guided by those Usages and Rites which were observed at the Paschal-Feast as if the Customes then were presidents to govern and direct us now and as if this Feast of ours were not only Analagous unto but also a Representation and Memorial of that Festival among the Jews But all this is nothing but a Rope of sand and any man may find it so that will but consider the thing rightly For this being a sacrifical Banquet at which we do Commemorate the intollerable sufferings and infinite Love of the Son of God such Rituals are to be observed now as are most Congruous and suitable to the Nature and Ends of this Mystery As for the Passeover-Supper it is ceased and out of doors long ago together with those observances which were belonging and appendant to it and we have nothing to do with them because they were grounded upon special rea sons and were of proper use and of peculiar significancy to the Jews Thus the Time of its Celebration was to be at Night because it was in the Night time that the Lord smote the first born of the Egyptians and passed over the houses of the Israelites and this concerns us no more than it concerns us to Celebrate the very
Kindness and gratious Intentions towards them for this is matter of Faith and Hope which are the things we must necessarily go upon in all our addresses unto the Father of mercies but yet the fruit of eating and drinking here is Joy and Peace to every honest hearted Communicant because his Faith and Hope is hereby much the stronger and built upon more sure and certain grounds 'T is true also that a mans pardon is begun before he doth make his appraoches that is if he makes his approaches regularly and like a good Christian for he must repent first of all his transgressions and that doth dispose him for Gods mercy and makes him meet to be a Partaker of it We must not presume to go to the Lords Table with guilt about us or while we are Reeking in our Sins but Repentance must wipe our defilements off because Christs Body and Bloud is not food for Swine As the Paschal Lamb was not to be eaten but by persons that were pure and clean according to the Sanctifications of the Law so this Christian Passeover Feast is not to be celebrated but by such persons as are purged by Repenance which is the Sanctification of the Gospel Yet all this not withstanding the Blessed Sacrament is an Ordinance of very great concernment and comfort to the cleanest Communicant for though he hath Repented long ago and though upon his having done so he hath great Reason to Hope that he is Reconciled unto God yet this Reconciliation is as yet but imperfect in comparison A man is not fully perfectly and finally pardoned till he hath Ended his Life well While we Live we are still Transacting our business with Heaven but do not finish our work till we dye My Pardon is Inchoa ted upon my Repentance 't is compleatd and irrevocable upon my Perseverance unto the End but t is Confirm'd to me upon my due Eating and Drinking at this Solemnity Hereby all former Grants are Ratified and Sealed anew so that now we have a fair Evidence to shew for our discharge and such an Evidence as will be valid and hold in the day of Judgement if we be not so Foolish as to Cancel the Deed our selves and render our Title to a blessed Eternity Null and void by returning again with the dog to his vomit A Release you know may pass between Parties onely by the Consent and Promise of the Injured Person but when once it is committed to Deed the act is then Confirmed and the Seal which is affixt to the Deed makes that Sure in Law with before was onely Parol or by Promise In like manner though our forgiveness be Inchoated and Begun upon our Repentance yet it is Continued Ratified and Ascertain'd unto us upon our Participation so that he who was justified is justified still and his Justification is more certain certitudine Subjecti than it was before that is a Sincere Commu nicant hath better Hopes to comfort himsurer grounds to go upon more to shew and say for himself more to plead against the clamours of his Conscience more and better Reasons to be Quiet in his mind than when he was barely a Penitent To say the Truth if he doth not Backslide and Revolt he hath a certain Title to the Kingdom of Heaven Upon this account 't is every mans Interest to Communicate often The longer he lives the Older he grows the more he draws towards his grave still he should be the more intent upon this Duty that his Peace and Comfort may still receive the more Additions and that his Assurances may be the more and more strong so that by the blessing of God he may at last use such expressions as S. Paul did which I am sure no Non-Communicant in the world can with such Reason use I have fought a good fight I have finished my course I have kept the faith hence forth there is laid up for me a Crown of Righteousness 2. Tim. 4. 7. 8. CHAP. VII Thirdly We really communicate of Christ Glorified The Doctrine of Transubstantiation condemned as utterly contrary to sence Reason and the Holy Scriptures BEsides that participation of Christ Crucified which is Mystical by Interpretation and Construction as I have shew'd already there is also at this Ordinance a participation of Christ Glorified So 't is Exprest in the Prayer of Consecration which is Real by our being actually made partakers of his most Blessed Body and Bloud This is manifestely the Doctrine of our Church that the Body and Bloud of Christ are verily and indeed taken and received by the Faithful in the Lords Supper and that our Souls are strengthened and Refreshed by the Body and Bloud of Christ as our Bodies are by the Bread and Wine Now our Bodies receive nourishment by our actual receiving the very Substances of Bread and Wine and so according to the Comparison our Souls also do receive strengh and Comfort by actually receiving and participating of the very Nature of Christ After the same manner was the Faith of the Church of England delivered in the beginning of the Reformation by that truly Learned and Great man Arch-Bishop Cranmer in that Admirable Book of his called a Defence of the true and Catholick Doctrine of the Sacrament wherein he doth often use Fol. 32 33 73 100. Et alibi fol. 42 76 84. that Similitude That as the Bread and Wine Corporally comfort and feed our Bodies so doth Christ with his Flesh and Bloud spiritually comfort and feed our Souls and he positively affirms that by the Communion we receive spiritual food and supernatural nourishment from Heaven of the very true Body and Bloud of our Saviour Christ that our Souls by faith do eat his very body and drink his Bloud though spiritually Sucking out of the same everlasting Life and that the Hearts of them that receive the Sacraments are secretly inwardly and Spiritually Transformed renew'd fed comforted and nourisht with Christs Flesh and Bloud through his most holy Spirit the same Flesh and Bloud still remaining in Heaven So that according to the sense of the Church of England not onely the Sacrifice of Christs Death is in the account of God Sacramently Imputed unto us for the Pardon of sin but moreover the very Glorified Jesus now Living and sitting in Heaven is in the Reality of the thing Actually Communicated unto us from above and verily received by us in the Sacrament And the outward Elements of Bread and Wine are not onely Signes and Tokens much less Empty Tokens and Bare Signs of Christs Body and Bloud but are also the Means and Instruments of bringing the whole Christ to us so that his Flesh and Bloud do Really but after a Spiritual and wonderfull manner go along with the Bread and Wine to Sustain and Refresh the Soul as They do the Body I know very well that I am now entring upon the Tenderest point concerning this Sacrament perhaps upon the Nicest speculation in the whole Body of Divinity
Ignatius the Martyr who lived in the Apostolical 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. S. Ignat. Ep. ad Smyrnaeos age that they would not receive the Sacrament because they would not Confess the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour which suffered for our Sins and which was raised again by the goodness of the Father Undoubtedly the Holy Martyr meant that they would not own the Bread to be the Sign and Figure of Christs Body as all Catholicks then believed For the Question was whether our Saviour lived and dyed and rose again in a true Humane Body The Church proved that he did so because he appointed bread to be the Figure of his Body But had they believed the Doctrine of Transubstantiation it would have proved that Christ had a Body which was made of meal not of the substance of the Virgin a Body which did not suffer upon the Cross nor Rise again but it would never have proved that which the Catholicks contented for and so they would have Lost the Question in hand and made Si propterea Corpus sibi finxit quia corporis carebat veritate ergo panem debuit tradere pro nobis Faciebat ad vanitatem Marcionis ut panis cruâ—ifigeretur Tertull. adv Marcion lib 4. themselves Ridiculous to their Adversaries Seeing then the Church in those times believed the bread to be the Figure and Image of Christs Body as Tertullian and Origen affirmed and S. Ignatius meant it is Nonsence to conceive that they believed it to be his very Natural Flesh For how can it be the Figure of a thing and the very real thing too How can I call this the Picture of Christ if I believe it to be Christ himself How can I say it is the Image Nemo potest ipse sibiâ— Imago sui esse Ambros de Fide lib. 1. Neque ipse sibi quisquam imago Hilar. Imago corporis non potest esse ipsum divinum Corpus Concil Nicaen 2. Actione 6. Pignus imago alterius rei sunt id est non adse sed ad aliud aspiciunt Bertram de Corp. Sang. Christi of his Flesh if it be the very Same This doth evidently shew that the Ancient Church did not in the least imagine that the bread is turnd into his very natural Body 3. It is observable that the Primitive Christians aknowledged two distinct Natures in the Sacrament meaning the material Element and that blessed Spiritual thing which goes along with it Thus we are told by Ireneus who was but one remove from the Apostles that the bread which is of the Earth after the calling upon God is no longer || E terra panis percipiens invocationem Dei jam non communis panis est sed Eucharistia ex duabus rebus constans terrena caelesti Iren. adv Haer. l. 4. c. 34. Common bread but the Eucharist consisting of two things an Earthly and an Heavenly thing Thus also Origen doth distinguish the Typical and Symbolical body of Christ meaning the †Materia Panis Orig. in Matth. c. 25. Haec quidem de Typico Symbolicoque corpore Multa porro de ipso verbo dici possunt quod factum est caro verus cibus Ibid. Bread from his True Humane Nature which he calls the Word that was made Flesh the true Food of life So likewise * Nec panem reprobavit Christus quo ipsum corpus suum representavit Tertull. adv Marcion l. 1. Tertullian doth distinguish the Bread which represents Christs Body from the Body it self which is represented by it In like manner the Author of the book de Caena Domini ascribed to S. Cyprian doth distinguish between the bodily Substance of the Holy Viands and that Divine Virtue which is present with them Lastly S. Austin Hoc est quod dicimus hoc modis omnibus approbare contendimus Sacrificium scilicet Ecclesiae duobus confici duobus constare visibili Elementorum specie invisibili Domini nostri Jesu Christi carne sanguine Sacramento Re Sacramenti id est Corpore Christi August apud Gratian. de Consecratione distinct 2. c. 48. as he is quoted by the Collector of the Decrees is positive and plain that the Sacrifice of the Church is made up of two things consisteth of two things the visible Substance of the Elements for that is the meaning of the word species among the Ancients and the Invisible Flesh and Bloud of our Lord Jesus Christ the Sacrament and the thing of the Sacrament or the thing Communicated by the Sacrament namely the Body of Christ To which purpose S. Austin speaks himself up and down in many places of his Writings By this it doth appear that the Christian Doctors for the Quia omnis res illarum rerum naturam veritatem in se continet ex quibus conficitur Id. Ibid. first 400. years acknowledged two distinct and real natures to make up the Eucharist for every thing contains in it the Nature and Truth of those things whereof it doth consist saith S. Augustin which they could not have acknowledged had they conceived the Nature and Substance of the Elements to be turned into the Nature and Substance of Christs Body and Bloud Transubstantiation implyes the total Destruction of the Earthly Nature and Substance which is utterly repugnant to the sense of the Ancients of whom we confidently affirm that as with one mouth they still called it Bread even when 't is broken distributed and received so they distinguisht it still from that which is Represented by the Bread And so true is this that the Whereas in the genuine Epistle of Ignatius ad Philadelph it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Interpolator renders it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. very Interpolator of Ignatius and the Ancient Interpreter of his Epistles speaking of the Eucharist say There is one Flesh of our Lord Jesus and one Bloud which was shed for us and there is one Bread or Loaf which is broken for all Which Observation makes it clear that the Bread and Christs Flesh were believed to be two distinct Natures and so that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation was not thought of in that age wherein that Interpolator and Interpreter did live whensoever that was 4. For the further clearing of this thing yet it is observable in the fourth place of the Primitive Fathers that they Resembled the Union of those two Natures in the Sacrament to the Union of the Two Natures in our Saviours Person To this purpose Justin Martyr discoursing of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 leg 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 meaning the words of Institution 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Justin Mart. Apol. 2. Eucharist saith we do not receive those things as common bread or common drink but as Jesus Christ our Saviour was by the word of God made Flesh and had Flesh and Bloud for our salvation so we believe that Food which is blessed by Prayer and by
his word whereby our Flesh and Bloud are by alteration nourisht to be the Flesh and Bloud of our Incarnate Saviour As Christ was God and man by the union of two real and distinct Substances the Humane and divine Substance so must the Eucharist be believed to consist of two real and distinct Natures the visible and invisible nature which Joannes Langus observed to be so strong an Argument against Transubstantiation that the Expurgatory Indexes have ordered his Annotations upon those words of Justin to be Quod Transubstantiationem non agnoseit sed apertè contendat cum corpore sanguine Christi remanere veram panis vini Substantiam Ind. Belgic p. 76. blotted out So he that wrote the forementioned book of the Lords Supper affirmeth that as in the Person of Christ the Humanity was seen and the Divinity was hid so in the visible Sacrament the Divine Essence infuseth it self after an invisible and ineffable manner S. Augustin S. Hillary and others of the Antients use the very same similitude and conclude that the Mystery of the Eucharist where two real Vide Augustin in Gratian de Consecr Distinct 2. c. 72. Hilar. de Trin. 1. 8. Ibid. c. 82. Natures go together in the same Sacrament is like the Mystery of the Incarnation where two real Substances were united together in the same Person For the Romanists themselves dare not say that only the Accidents of Humanity were in our Lord at his Incarnation and therefore they ought not to say neither that only the Accidents of bread and wine are in the Eucharist after Consecration At least they ought not to appeal to Antiquity for this conceit it being plainly the sense of the Primitive Church that as the Nature of Man was neither abolisht nor changed into Christs Divinity when 't was united to it so neither is the nature of bread abolisht or changed into Christs Body when 't is administred with it 5. It is observable that whereas some Hereticks in the Ancient times denyed our Saviour to have two several Natures the Catholicks proved he had so by this known received Principle because there are two several Natures in the Sacrament which is a Figure of Christ This is a thing which requires particular observation because it will clearly and undeniably prove that the sense of the Church which I have shewn for the first 300. years was the same still and indeed more plain if possible for the two Centuries next following The occasion of their speaking so plainly was this Between the third and fourth Century there brake out the pestilent heresie of Apollinaris S. Aug. de Haeres c. 55. who held that our Lord took not his Body of the holy Virgin but that the Word was made Flesh so that the Deity was turned and transubstantiated into the Manhood Against this Heresie S. Chrysostom undertook the defence of the Catholick Faith that Christ at his Incarnation was both God and Man one Person of two Natures joyned together which are not one Substance but each hath its Properties distinct from the other And how doth he prove this Why he argues from the condition of the Holy Sacrament wherein there are two Natures so that neither is the Bread turned into Christs Flesh nor his Flesh into Bread but both are distinct Sicut enim antequam Sanctisicetur panis panem nominamus Divina autem illum Sanctificante gratia medinate Sacerdote liberatus est quidem ab appellatione Panis dignus autem habitus est Dominici Corporis â—appellatione ersi Natura panis in ipso Permansâ—t non duo corpora sed unum flii corpus praedicatur sic hîc divina insidente corpori natura unum filium unam personam utraque haec fecerunt S. Chrysoft Ep. ad Caesarium contra Appollinarem in themselves though they go As saith S. Chrysostom before the Consecration of the bread we call it bread but when the Grace of God hath sanctified it by the Priest it is delivered from the name of Bread and is exalted to the Lords Body though the Nature of Bread remaineth still and so two things make one Eucharist so here the Divine Nature is in the Body of Christ but these two Substances are distinct and make one Son and one Person This is a very plain testimony on our side Afterwards the Apollinarians were divided in their opinions for they shifted and were Unstable for want of truth and then Theodoret took up the quarrel against them all in his book entitled Polymorphos For then the Heresie of Eutyches appeared abroad whose opinion was that though Christ had at First two Natures yet after the Union of them the Humanity ceased was quite absorpt and Transubstantiated into the Divinity To prove this those Hereticks drew an argument from the Eucharist Christs Body said they was turned into his Deity at the Ascension even as the Bread and Wine are turned into his Flesh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodoret Dialog 1. and Bloud upon Consecration But to his Theodoret answered roundly that Christ honoured the visible Symbols with the name of his Body and Bloud not changing their Nature but to their Nature adding Grace And whereas it was urged again by those Hereticks that the Symbols of the Lords Body and Bloud are one thing before Invocation and another thing after Theodoret told them that they were taken in their own nets because the Mystical Signs do not Id. Dialog 2. depart from their own Nature after Sanctification but Remain in their former Substance aswell as in their Figure and form If this be not Home and Plain I know not what can be and yet we have a Further Testimony from the mouth of Gelasius who was Bishop of Rome too about 500 years after our Saviour He wrote an Excellent Book of the Two Natures of Christ against the Eutychians and Nestorians and how doth he argue Why he clears the Catholick Faith by arguing from the Eucharist too and these Gelas de duabus Naturis in Christo are his words Indeed the Sacraments of Christ Body and Bloud which we receive are a Divine thing for by them we are made partakers of the Divine Nature and yet it doth not cease to be the Substance or Nature of Bread and Wine The Image and Similitude of Christs Body and Bloud is in the Action of the Mysteries and by this it appears that we must think that to be in Christ which we Profess celebrate and take in the Image that as they pass into a Divine Substance by the Operation of the Holy Spirit the Nature of the things remaining still in their own Propriety so is the Principal Mysterie the Efficiency and Virtue whereof the Sacraments do Represent by their Continuing what they were it appears that they shew one entire and true Christ to continue also If this be not enough yet we will produce Ephraim the Patriarch for another witness after Gelasius He wrote very learnedly against
third book of the Arch-Bishops defence This I shall presume to say that Church Writers about Damascens time and Damascen himself spake for the most part as other of the Ancients did They spake to the same purpose and in many places to my apprehension very clearly and very agreeably to the sense of our own Church viz. of the real presence of Christs Spiritual body which in the next discourses I shall endeavour to explain tho possibly here and there we may light upon some few expressions which may seem somewhat harsh to such as do not rightly understand the Catholick Faith in this particular point Indeed Cardinal Bellarmine doth insinuate Bellarm. de Euchar. lib. 1. c. 1. that the Doctrine of Christs Corporal presence in the Sacrament was believed at the Second Council at Nice about the year of Christ 787. And herein the Jesuite is followed by some Divines of our own who have taken the insinuation from Bellarmine at the second hand and have thence concluded that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation had its rise at that Council that thereby the Practice of Image-Worship might be the better settled and supported But this is false and I cannot tell whether this error proceeds from inadvertency or from a willingness some have to disgrace the Catholick Church as if it had been guilty of such a foul mistake in those ancient times I am sure that upon looking into the Nicene Council 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synod Nicen 2. Actione Sexta I cannot find any such matter They determined indeed that after Consecration the bread and Wine are rightly called the body and blood of Christ But why must this be meant of Christs Natural Body Why might they not intend his Spiritual body and his real Spiritual presence of which anon Do but observe the occasion of this their assertion and the thing will evidently appear The Council at Constantinople were against the bringing of Images into Churches for this reason among many others because Christ left no Image of himself but the Sacrament At this expression the Nicene Council afterwards took pet and would not endure such Language that the materials of the Sacrament are the Images of Christs body and blood for they supposed the meaning to be that they are bare Images naked and empty Figures without the presence of Christs body and blood and this they exploded as unsound and uncatholick Doctrine Here was the quarrel as to that point For whereas the Constantinopolitan Council had said that the Eucharist became a Divine body the Nicene Council accused them for contradicting themselves for said they if it be the Image of a Body it cannot be a Divine Body too They denied the Sacrament to be a bare Image they affirmed it to be not so much an Image as the very Body of Christ and that so it ought to be called but that they hold a corporal presence of Christs Natural flesh and blood in the Sacrament there is nothing in the whole History o that Council that constraineth us to believef and therefore the Doctrine of Transubstantiation had not its first rise then In the ninth Century Dum quidam fidelium corporis sanguinisque christi quod in Ecclesia quotidie celebratur Mysterium dicunt quod nulla sub figura nulla sub obvelatione fiat sed ipsius veritatis nuda manifestatione peragatur Quidam vero restantur quod haec sub mysterii figura contineantur aliud sit quod corporeis sensibus appareat aliud artem quod fides aspiciat non parva diversitas inter eos esse dignoscitur Bertram de Corp. Sang. Christ indeed some began to speak variously 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. and doubtfully concerning the manner of Christs presence in the Sacrament which in a little time was the occasion of Bertrams writing his excellent book of the Body and Blood of Christ to Carolus Calvus then Emperor De Char. c. 11. But even in that Age Rabanus Maurus taught as the received Doctrine of the Church that it is unlawful as well as im impossible Nefas is his word to eat the body of Christ with our Teeth that Christ is in Heaven and ought to be there according to his flesh and that therefore he left us this Sacrament as the visible figure and character of his flesh and Blood He distinguisheth as many of the Ancients before him did between the Sacrament De institut Cleric lib. 1. c. 13. and the virtue of the Sacrament affirming the one to be eaten with the mouth and the Inward man to be satiated with the other so that though the Sacrament De Institut Cleric lib. 1. c. 31. it self turneth to our Bodily nourishment yet eternal life is obtained by the virtue of the Sacrament And whereas Paschasius Radbertus and his followers had now vended some new conceits which had a tendency towards the introduction of the Doctrine of Transubstantiation he wrote purposely against them as erronous conceits some of late says he being not rightly perswaded of the Sacrament of Christs Body and Bloud have affirmed it to be that very Body and Bloud of our Lord which was born of the virgin and wherein the Lord Suffered upon the Cross and rose again out of the Sepulchre De Euchar. 33. which error saith he we have exposed with the best of our skill in an Epistle to Egilo the Abbot That Epistle indeed is not now extant but the matter of fact is certain and the faith of that great man Rabanus was so well know to be utterly destructive of the Fancy of Transubstantiation that Waldensis in an Epistle to Pope Martin the 5th almost 600 years after had the confidence to censure Rabanus for an Heretick though he were no less then Archbishop of Mentz and for all sorts of learning had few in the Christian world that were his Match Haymo likewise affirmed that the Bread and Wine for so he call the Elements In 1. Cor. 11. after Consecration are replenished with the virtue of our Lords Divinity and so become his Body but this doth no more argue Transubstantiation then it argues that Christs Humane Nature is turned into his Divine Substance because that in him the fulness of the God-head dwelleth bodily Bertram was a very learned and judicious Divine in the same age and he in the Book I mentioned but now gives the Cause against the Romanists so fully and argues against Christ's Corporal presence in the Sacrament so strongly from the Nature and Notion of a Sacramant from sense from Scripture and from Tradition that the Knavish Compilers of the Spanish Index Expurgatorius had no way Bertram de corp ' Sang. Christi left them but to forbid the Use of the Book which to my sense was the same thing as if they had said we will damn all Authors or cut out their Tongues that we can find to Speak against us Behold the Honesty and Ingenuity of those who vaunt
were properly called Sacramentaries and which is the opinion of those black-mouth'd Hereticks the Socinians now This was an Heterodox conceit indeed that was utterly against the Faith of the Catholick Church from the beginning and out of hatreed and detestation of this foul Error the Bishop of Rome and others presently fell into another extreme as foul as that as usually men do when they are in Heat and Passion Then the Doctrine not so much of Christs real as of his corporal presence was laid upon the Anvil and Lancfranck and Guitmund Berengarius his Enemies See the Confession which was extorted from Beren garius at Rome and which he afterwards retracted in Gratian de Consec dist 2. c. 24. fell a hammering at it and then they would not be satisfyed with this which yet had satisfied Christians for above a thousand years that Christs Divine Body is verily communicated after a Spiritual manner to the faithful But they would needs have it that his Natural Body is actually eaten with mens mouths and handled with their hands However this was the sense but of a few men as yet and all men were yet at liberty to opine and dispute as long as they did it Modestly For Fulbertus was against the new opinion and at the second Synod at Rome against Berengarius under Gregory the seventh Anno 1079 they did declare that there was great variety of opinions about the Body Habitus est Sermo de Corpore Sanguine Domini nostri multis haec nonnullis alia sentientibus and Bloud of Christ in the Sacrament as may be seen in the Acts of that Synod and Adelmannus though he blamed Berengarius yet was he against Lancfranck not owning that Conceit of Christs Corporal presence Lancfranck maintain'd it here in England and he was the first man that planted that weed in this Island but all men were not of his opinion here though he was a man of great Authority and in Foreign parts the point continued disputable for a long time for S. Bernard who lived in the twelfth Century current was of another opinion and Peter Lombard who was fifty years after him found it to be a moot point even in his days and he tells us himself what various opinions there were about it then so that for a matter of 1200. years together P. Lomb. Sentent l. 4. dist 11. the Doctrine of Transubstantation you see was not determin'd In the Primitive times and for some Centuries after it was not thought of In later ages it was but dreamt of and when men began to talk of it they talked as if they were asleep and they declared their several opinions as men tell their Dreams 't was no Article of Faith no not in the Church of Rome till the Lateran Council Anno 1215. nay some Learned men are of opinion that it was Vide Mr. Thorndike of the Laws of the Church p. 37 Bish Taylor of the Real Pres p. 267. not determined then neither but some time after But let that rest for me I will enquire after it no further now since we have found it already a child of Fancy and an upstart too that was Begotten of Late and brought into the World by the midwifry of time but cannot derive its Pedigree from any of the Holy Fathers we must lay the Brat at the Church of Romes door it is their own and since they are so fond of it without any sense or reason let them keep it if they please so they keep it to themselves though we wish it had been an Abortive or had dyed a Chrisom specially since it hath cost so much Christian Bloud to Foster and Breed it up CHAP. IX That though there be no Transubstantiation yet Christs Body is really in the Sacrament A distinction between Christs Natural and Spiritual Body What is meant by his Spiritual Body Why so called That such a Spipiritual there is And that it is received in and by the Sacrament TO proceed though there be no grounds in the World for the opinion of Transubstantiation yet we must not conceive that Christ is not verily really and of a truth in the Sacrament he may be really present though there be no reason to believe that he is present after a Corporal manner For two different Substances and Natures may be joyned and go together though they remain distinct in themselves and in their properties as the Soul and Flesh of a man are united in the same Person and as the Humanity and Divinity of Christ were united together in the same Lord. Though we should suppose that Pillar to have been a real cloud which went before the Israelites yet it will not follow that God was not in it though we shoiuld suppose those shapes to have been true Bodies wherein the Spirits of God were wont to appear to the old Patriarchs yet this doth not argue that Angelical Substances were not present in them though we should suppose that to have been a real Dove which lighted on our Saviour and that to have been real Fire which sate upon his Apostles yet this will not argue but that the Holy Ghost was in both In like manner though we grant the Elements in the Eucharist to be Substantially and really Bread and Wine yet it will not follow by any means that Christ is not present in the Sacrament it is easy to conceive it possible for it to be Bread still and Christs Body too and to be wine still and Christs Bloud too There may be an union of these two things though we do not suppose the Nature of the one to be destroyed or turned into the nature of the other And that this is not only possible but is certainly so de facto the Scripture doth strongly oblige us to believe For 1. S. Paul tells us that the administration of the Sacrament is the Communion of Christs Body and Bloud 1 Cor. 10 16. which words are to be understood not only of that foederal Vid. S. Chrysostâ—n 1 Cor. 10. 16. Communion which we have thereby with Christ but moreover of that real Comunication which we have of him so that by drinking of the Wine we participate of Christs Bloud which streamed out of his side and which he gives us here as well as he shed it on the Cross and by eating of the Bread we do not only Partake of his Body but also obtain thereby a close Conjunction and Coherence with him whose Body it is we are united to him by the Bread even as our Flesh is united to Christ himself as S. Chrysostom affirms which doth plainly argue the real presence and communication of his Body and Bloud 2. Again whereas S. Paul saith I Cor. II. 27. Whosoever shall eat this Bread and drink this Cup of the Lord unworthily shall be guilty of the Body and Bloud of the Lord he doth seem manifestly to conclude that Christs Body and Bloud is really in the Eucharist that all worthy
eo dictum est Ecce ego vobiscum sum usque ad consummationem seculi Secundum carnem vero quod verbum assumpsit secundum id quod de Virgine natus est secundum id quod a Hudaeis prebensus est quod ligno confixus quod de cruce depositus quod linteis involutus quod in sepulchro conditus quod in resurrectione manifestatus non semper habebitis vobiscum S. Aug. Tractat. 50. in John plainly in respect of that Body which was assumed by the Word which was born of the Virgin which was apprehended by the Jews which was nailed to the Tree which was taken down from the Cross and was wrapped up and laid in the Sepulchre in respect of that Body we have him not with us but in respect of his Majesty in respect of his Providence in respect of his Ineffable and invincible Grace that promise of his is fulfilled lo I am with you alwayes even unto the end of the world And speaking of the Eucharist he doth distinguish between Nam nos bodie accipimus visibilem cibum used aliud est Sacramentum aliud virtus Sacramenti S. Aug. Tractat. 26. in John Usque ad Spiritûs participationem manducemus bibamus Id Tract 27. the Sacrament it self and the virtue of the Sacrament calling that the Grace of Christ which is not consumed with our Teeth and the participation of the Spirit This is that which S. Austin elsewhere calls the Intelligible the Invisible the Spiritual Body of Christ that which Ireneus calls the Heavenly thing that which Clement and Jerome call the spiritual Flesh and Bloud of the Lord That which Pseudo-Cyprian calls the Divine Virtue the Divine Essence the Divine Majesty the participation of the Spirit the drink which flowes and streams from that Spiritual Rock Christ Jesus That which S. Ambrose calls the spiritual Aliment and the Body of a Divine Spirit that which others call the Lords Immortality his Divine Body the Truth of his Body the Nutriment of the Inward Man the vital Pulment of the Incarnate Deity and divers other expressions we meet with in old Authors signifying the wonderful vertues of Christs Glorified Humanity whereof every Faithful Soul is made Partaker S. Ifidore Pelusiot conceived that the roasting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Isidor Pelus Ep. 219. l. 1. of the Paschal Lamb with Fire did Typically fignifie that Christ the true Pasleover was to unite the Fire of the Divine Essence to his Flesh to be eaten of us That 's his Experssion and it shews his opinion that we receive the virtue of his Divine through his Humane Nature Among modern Foreign Writers none seems to me to have explained this thing better than the moderate and Judicious Author of the Diallacticon Eucharistiae a Book written about 130. years ago to compose all controversies Hoc corpus hunc sanguinem carnem hanc substantiam corporis non communi more nec ut humana ratio dictat accipi oportet sed it a nominari existimari credi propter eximios quosdam effectus virtutes proprietates conjunctas quae corpori sanguini Christi natura in sunt nempe quod Pascat animas nostras vivificet simul corpora ad resurrectionem immortalitatem praeparet Dialact pag. 33. 34. Non hic cogitandûm est nos crudas bominis carnes comedere vel sanguinem bibere Sed verba spiritalia esse spiritualiter intelligenda carnem quidem sanguinem nominari sed de Spiritu Vita idest vivifica dominicae carnis virtute debere intellagi c. Ibid. pag. 25. Quia figur a veri corporis panis est jure Corpus appellatur quia virtutem ejusdem vitalem conjunctam habet multo magis tum vero maxime quod utrumque complectitur Ibid. pag 54. Panis Domini Corpus Christi est quia gratiam virtutem ejus vitalem conjunctam habet Quod outem haec non commentitia aut nuper nata sententia est sed ab antiquis recepta approbata Scriptoribus claris ipsorum testimoniis confirmabimus Ibid. pag. 57. about the Sacrament and he too goes altogether this way shewing that that Body of Christ which is present with us is his spiritual Body and that we communicate thereof by deriving Efficacy Power and Vital Virtue from the Body of the Lord. And this account I am the better pleased and satisfied with because it was a Notion that was en tertained and really asserted by a very Learned Doctor of our own Church with Dr. Jack vol. 3. p. 325. Seq whose words I shall conclude this consideration we must not collect saith he that Christs Body because comprehended within the Heavens can exercise no real operation upon our Bodies or Souls here on Earth or that the live Influence of his Glorified Humane Nature may not be diffused through the World as he shall be pleased to dispense it no we must not take upon us to limit or bound the Efficacy of Christs Body upon the Bodies or Souls which he hath taken into his Protection there are Influences of Life which his Humane Nature doth distill from his Heavenly Throne And the Sacramental Bread is called his Body and the Sacramental Wine his Bloud as for other reasons so especially for this because the Virtue and Influence of his most Bloudy Sacrifice is most plentifully and most effectually distilled from Heaven unto the worthy Receivers and many more things he saith to the same effect By this account we may easily undergand the meaning of the sixth chapter of S. John which hath so puzled many Learned Interpreters and we may fairly give the reason of the Sentence of our Lords Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of man and drink his Bloud ye have no life in you For the Principle of life comes from our Lords Glorified Humanity and unless we receive into our Souls the vital Virtue which distilleth from it we can be in no other than a dead Condition I do not mean that 't is impossible to have life without receiving the Sacrament no there is that which Divines call a Sacramental and Spiritual receiving of Christ and a Spiritual receiving only when men eat and drink after a right manner they receive both the Sacrament and also the thing or virtue of the Sacrament but yet men may derive and by Faith do derive virtue from Christ without the Sacrament if they do not abstain through negligence or the love of sin and the like The Grace of God is not tyed to Sacraments so but that God may dispense it as he pleaseth nor are we to conceive that the Blessed Body of Christ doth quicken none but at the Communion CHAP. X. That Christs Spiritual Body is actually verily and really taken and received by the Faithful in the Lords Supper Proved from the Analogy thereof to other Sacrifical Feasts among Jews and Heathens From S. Pauls Viscourse 1 Cor. 10. and from the sense of
Ireneus tells us particularly of that Wizard Marcus Iren. adv Haer. l. 1. c. 9. that he became familiar with Demons and fascinated his Disciples especially of the female Sex after this manner Now this I take to be the full importance and design of that Phrase 1 Cor. 10. 20. where S. Paul saith I would not that ye should have fellowship with Divels 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be Communicants with and Partakers of Divels meaning that they should not have any the least society with them lest by sitting at their Tables they should come to be governed acted and inspired by them as Demoniacks were And this gives a great deal of Light to those places of Scripture where we are said to have the Communication of the Body and of the Bloud of Christ and to be partakers of the Lords Table For the full meaning of these expressions is that by feasting together at the Table of the Lord we do participate of our Lords Spiritual Body and of his Spiritual Bloud so as that we are Influenced by him and receive Spiritual Virtue Power and Energy from him that as the Possessed of old were thought to have a Divine Numen in them so every devout Receiver of the Lords Supper may be said to have God and Christ in them because they are lead by Hence Demoniacks were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Maxim in Pseudodyonis de Eccl. c. 3. So the Saints of Christ were ancienly called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Ignatius the Martyr was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clem. Alex. Trajanus dixit Quis est Theophorus Ignatius respondit Qui Christum habet in pectore vide Acta Ignatii pag. 3. c. the Spirit and receive the Graces of the Spirit of God Christ in Virtue of Christs Body and Bloud The Socinians go a great way round about to fetch a wrested interpretation of these words of S. Paul The Cup of bessing which we bless is it not the Communion of the Bloud of Christ the bread which we break is it not the Communion of the Body of Christ 1 Cor. 10. 16. For whereas they understand those words to this effect that our celebration of the Eucharist is a Declaration of that Communion we have with that sacred Society the Church which is the Mystical Body of Christ the Interpretation is Impertinent Idle and Ridiculous because that place of Scripture doth plainly signifie a Communication of Christs Bloud as well as of his Body nay of that bloud which was shed and of that Body which was given for us and this cannot be meant of his Body Mystical Some again are as wide on the other hand who though they grant a Communication of Christs very Body yet never the less Deny the Reality of its presence which is a meer Riddle and an unintelligible notion for how can we conceive that we really partake of Christs Body at the Sacrament if it be not really there to deny him to be Present and yet to affirm that we receive him Spiritually Mystically and Sacramentally is nothing else but to use so many dark expressions to cover Non sense it being impossible to imagine how we can Communicate of that which is Not and 't is as plain a Contradiction to say that we eat of Christs Body and drink of his Bloud if his Body and Bloud be not Present as it is to say that we receive Christ and yet not receive him at the same time Nor doth it mend the matter to say that we receive Christ by faith For if Christ be not Present and at our hand I cannot see how all the faith in the world can help us to receive him Christ doth dwell indeed in every Believers heart and faith doth dispose and qualifie us for the reception of him but how can faith bring that to me which is not nigh me and which is not her below to be gime Faith is a perswasion of the mind and this perswasion worketh upon mine own heart but cannot work upon the object of my faith so as to bring that to me which is really above in heaven onely Nay we must suppose the Body and Bloud of our Saviour to be in the Sacrament or else we cannot Rightly believe that we do receive him for to believe that I receive Christ at the Sacrament when at the same time I believe that he is not Really there is a Lying faith that contradicteth and confuteth it self Seeing then 't is reasonable to believe that Christs Body and Bloud are actually and verily in the Sacrament it must be granted that they are there either in respect of their Natural Substance or in respect of their Spiritual but Real Virtues and in respect of those Divine Influences which are by means of the Sacrament derived from the man Christ Jesus But the first of these is a proposition so uncouth so irrational so repugnant to Scripture and all Antiquity and upon every account so impossible to be true that it nomore agreeth with Christianity then darkness doth agree with light Therefore if men well understand and speak sense they must grant S. Paul to speak in the fore-cited place of the Communication of Christs Spiritual Body and Bloud and so the thing will be obvious rational and intelligible for in regard that by the use of the blessed Sacrament we receive virtues and influences from our Lords Glorified Humanity we are very rightly said to Communicate of his Body In regard that these Virtues are not imaginary Ideas but Real things Real in themselves and of real effect and operation it is very proper to affirm that Christ is Really present in the Sacrament Lastly in regard that these virtues are of a Spiritual Nature and flow from him who is a Quickning Spirit and are dispensed by the Holy Spirit and are receive by and work upon our Spirits and are efficacious in order to our Spiritual Life and do make us partakers of the Divine Nature it is easie to conceive the reason why Christ is said to be present in the Eucharist after a Spiritual manner and so by this construction of the matter the Doctrine of Christs Real but Spiritual Presence and of the Real but Spiritual Communication of his Body and Bloud is secured and the darkest part of this Mystery lyes open and fair and easie to be understood by men of the most Vulgar capacities To this purpose Anselm understands those In 1. ad Cor. cap. 10. words of the Apostle the Cup of blessing which we bless is it not the Communication of Christs Bloud that is doth it not make those who drink of it worthily partakers of the Life of Christ which is designed by his Bloud doth it not make us partakers of his blessedness and Glory wherein our souls are made One with his by the Communication of the same Glory And so the Bread which we break is it not the participation of the
can we understand it but of that spiritual Energy and Virtue wherewith the Element is indued Epiphan in Anaceph and which efficaciously worketh by the power of Christ upon the soul of every worthy Communicant When Epiphanius speaketh so positively and so home that the Bread in the Eucharist and the Water in Baptism have their Virtue from Christ that 't is not the Bread it self that is efficacious but 't is the Virtue of the Bread wherewith Christ indues it and that the Bread indeed is Food but 't is the Virtue in it which serveth for vivification what can any man desire more plain more emphatical more full when St. Ambrose saith if the Book be his that we take Ambros de Sacram. lib. 6. c. the Sacrament as the Similitude of Christs body but do really receive the Grace and Virtue of Christs Nature 't is plain that he means those spiritual influences which are derived from him When St. Chrysostom Chrysostom Hom. 50. in Matth. to shew what benefits we have by receiving of Christ shews the benefits which they had who touched but the Hem of his garment undoubtedly he meant that we receive these benefits as they did by virtue which goeth out of him When St. Austin so often speaks of not the outward Symbols only but chiefly of the thing in the Sacrament of the Virtue of the Sacrament and of our eating and drinking even to the participation of the Spirit and saith that the Truth and virtue of Christs body is diffused every where what can any reasonable man suppose him to mean but that though Christ be in Heaven in his Body yet he is with us by his spirit and blesseth us all with his Spiritual influences but especially when we Celebrate the memory of his Passion When St. Cyril of Alexandria so frequently affirmeth that the Glorified Body of Christ is vivisick and makes the Sacrament vivisick too and saith that God condescending to our weakness Carene Thomae in Luc. 22. sendeth the Virtue of Life into the Bread and Wine that are before us turning them into the Energy or efficacy of his own flesh so that a quickning principle may be in us the sense is so plain and satisfactory that I will presume to say were St. Cyril alone allowed to be judge in this case there would hardly be any â—â—â—â—â—oversie at all in the Christian World about the blessed Sacrament unless it were this who should receive it oftnest and with the great est reverence This Divine and spiritual virtue derived from Christ and conveyed into the Sacrament is that which Theodoret means by that Grace which he saith Gratian. de Consecdist 2. c. 28. is added to the Nature of the Elements This is that too which Pope Leo and the Synod of Rome meant by the virtue of Theophyl in Marc. 14 Hugo de Mysteriis Eccles cap. 7. Gelas de duab Nat. in Christo this heavenly food that which Theophylact meant by the Virtue of Christs Flesh and Blood that which Hugo de St. Victore meant by the efficacy of the Sacrament by the spiritual Grace and by Christs spiritual Flesh that which Pope Gelasius meant by that Divine thing in the Eucharist whereby we are made partakers of the Divine Nature that which Beriram Bertram de Corp. Sang. de Domini meant by the invisible Bread the Power of the Divine word the Virtue of Christs Body and blood the invisible efficacy the spiritual flesh and blood of our Saviour and abundance of expressions more to the same purpose in his admirable Book to Carolus Calvus 'T is that too which Isidore Hispalensis meant Isidor Hispal de Eccl. Offis by the Divine Virtue which worketh salvation under the cover of earthly things That which Haymo meant by the grace of Haymo in Cor. 11. Sanctification whereby he saith the Plenitude of the Deity and the Divinity of Paschas Ratbert de Euchar. the Eternal Word filleth the Elements That which Paschasius Ratbertus himself meant by the Spiritual Flesh of Christ that vital Portion which every good Communicant receives of the fullness of Christs Divinity Lastly 't is that which Panis iste quem Dominus Discipulis porrigebat non effigie sed leg seu natura mutatus omni potentia Verbi factus est caro Et sicut in persona Christi Humanitas videbatur latebat Divinitas ita Sacramento visibili ineffabiliter Divina se infundit Essentia c. Pseudo-Cyprian de Caen. Dom. Et Superius lumen in inferiora diffusum claritatis suae plentitudine a fine usque ad finem attingens totum apud se manens totum se omnibus commodat caloris illius identitas ita corpori assidet ut a capite non recedat Id. ib. the Pseudo Cyprian meant by that Divine Vertue which he acknowledged to be in the Sacrament that Supersubstantial Bread as he calls it that Divine Essence and Majesty which accompany the Elements that effect of Eternal Life and that Latent Spirit whereof every devout and well disposed Christian doth participate I have not time to look into every particular Church-Writer but this I will presume to affirm that where any of the Ancients do harp upon Christs presence in the Sacrament they mean his presence by his Grace and Virtue and where they speak intelligibly and distinctly of this matter they speak plainly to this purpose intending by the body and bloud of Christ which we receive neither more nor less then those efficacious Virtues which are derived to his Church from his glorified Humanity this they call his Body and Bloud especially when they call it by way of distinction the spiritual Body and the spiritual Bloud of our Blessed Redeemer And this account is the rather to be received by us for several good Reasons 1. Because it makes this great Mystery very easie to be understood so that without any straining of our wits or forcing of Scripture we may readily and clearly conceive how we are said to Communicate of Christs Body and Bloud For do but conceive a notion of Christs spiritual Body and the account is very short and the matter is very intelligible 2. It shews the sense of the Catholick Church in former Ages to be the same with ours now For Christians did ever acknowledge two different things in this Mystery the outward sign and the inward Grace and accordingly they did every set a different Price upon these two things valuing most of all the spiritual Grace but yet Honouring the Element for the Grace sake Many times indeed they called the bread Christs Body because it signifies and represents and exhibits it but usually they called the Elements the Types the Antitypes the Figures the Images the Signs of our Lords Body and Bloud so the Author of the Constitutions Pseudo Dionysius Clemens Alexandrinus Tertullian Theodoret Eusebius Chrysostom Origen Cyril Basil Macarius Jerome Gregory Nazianzen and divers more so that we may well laugh
and sent portions unto them for whom nothing is prepared for this day is holy unto our Lord. Now this very custome was observed in the Primitive Church of Christ to be sure in Justin Martyrs time when the holy Sacrament was done For so that very ancient Writer tells us expresly that the distribution and participation of the Holy Bread and Wine being ended the remainders were sent by the Deacons to those Christians the Sick and Infirm that were Just Martyr Apol. 2. absent which Conformity of their with Pagans and Jews in point of practice doth plainly shew that they reckoned this their Solemnity to be Analogous and like to those other which were used by Pagans and all the Jews over world Viz. a Sacrifical Feast But St Pauls discourse doth seem to put the thing beyond all manner of controversie in 1 Cor. 10. where he argues against the lawfulness of participating of Idol-Feasts from that plain Analogy which the Lords Supper beareth thereunto And thus he demonstrates the point First that they who did eat of the Jewish Sacrifices did profess to be in Communion with the God of Israel Behold Israel after the flesh Are not they which eat of the Sacrifices partakers of the Altar ver 18. Secondly that in like manner they who did participate of the Heathen-Sacrifices which had been offered unto Demons did profess to be in Communion and to have fellowship with those Demons ver 20. Thirdly the Apostle infers that the Christian-Feast being the participation of the Body and Blood of Christ as he shew'd ver 16. it is impossible for men to partake of meats offered unto Idols without renouncing Christianity these two things being so utterly incompatible that we cannot drink the Cup of the Lord and the Cup of Devils we cannot be partakers of the Lords Table and the Table of Devils ver 21. As the Idol-Feasts were Sacrifical Banquets proper to the Heathens and as the Mosaical-Feasts were Sacrifical Banquets proper to the Jews so this our Feast is a Sacrifical Banquet proper to Christians and we may no more dare to eat of this and the other Feasts too then we may dare now to be Circumcised and turn Pagans after Baptism This is the meaning and argumentation of St. Paul and it plainly shews that there is a great Analogy likeness and resemblance between this and those other mysteries as to the nature thereof though the reasons the uses and respects are far different and utterly irreconcilable It is indeed a Sacrifical Feast as the others of old were but such a one as was instituted for the Disciples of Christ such a one as is intended for our participating of Christ for the tying of us to Christ such a one as immediately Refers to Christ such a one as directly tends to the Worshipping of Christ and of God in Christ But then we must note that of all the Sacrifical Banquets under the Law the Paschal Supper was that which this Christian Feast beareth the greatest Analogy unto This appeareth several ways 1. Because the Holy Jesus is called Our Passeover the Lamb that was slain to this purpose among others that we might Feed on him with all manner of inward Spiritual purity Christ our Passeover is sacrificed for us therefore let us keep the Feast not with old Leaven neither with the Leaven of Malice and wickedness but with the unleavened Bread of sincerity and Truth 1 Cor. 5. 7 8. 2. Because this Banquet was instituted at the close of the Passeover-Supper Dr. Hammonds Annor on Joh. 13. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysoft T. 5. p. 559 edit Sav. when our Saviour and his Disciples had done their meal after he had washed their feet after he sate down the second time and probably before the Traitor Judas was gone out of the Room St. Luke and St. Paul both expressly affirm of the Cup that Christ took it after Supper 3. The material parts of this Christian Feast are the same with what were used at the Paschal Supper excepting such things as were either Typical or of peculiar signification to the Jews For the bitter herbs were in memory of those bitter afflications they endured in Egypt and so they were of Proper and Peculiar use to the Sons of Israel In like manner the Lamb was a figure of Christ to come and the roasting of the Lamb upon a Spit was a representation of * Justin Martyr Dial. cum Tayph pag. 259 edit Par. the Passion of Christ upon the Cross which being accomplished once for all there was no further need of any Figure But the other parts of the Paschal Feast the Bread and Wine Christ continued the the use of them and order'd them to be used still by his Church in all places and to all Ages 4. The manner of celebrating the Paschal Feast was very like to that after which this Banquet was celebrated and that in two respects besides that of distribution 1. First in respect of those Benedictions See Godwyns Antiq. 1. 3. c. 2. which the Jews then offered up to God for creating bread and Wine for their present Festival for their deliverance out of Egypt for the Covenant of Circumcision and for the Law According Christus hoc loco non pro veteri tantum creatione sed pro novâ cujus ergo in bunc orbem venerat preces fudit gratiasque deo egit pro Redemptione humani generis quasi jam peractâ Grot. in Matth. 26. ver 26. unto which our Blessed Saviour consecrated the Materials of this Feast with eyes lifted up blessing God over the Bread and Wine and adding no doubt such other Praises as were Proper for the occasion for the recovery as well as for the Creation of the World and for the Redemption of Mankind which was then in a manner actually accomplisht 2. Secondly in respect of those Solemn Commemorations which did attend the eating of the Passeover For this peculiar Ceremony the Jews used at that time that the Master of the house where the Lamb was eaten did instruct the rest touching that Solemn Mystery and did open unto them the meaning of it declaring unto them that the Lamb before them was called the Passeover because God passed over Godwyns Antiq. lib. 3. cap. 4. the houses of their Fathers in Egypt that the bitter Herbs were in memory of those hard usages whereby the Egyptians made the Lives of their Fathers bitter and that the Unleavened Bread was in token of the great haste their Fathers made out of Egypt by reason of which their Dough was not leavened and this Rite was called Haggadah that is the annunciating the declaring the shewing forth of the Passeover In like manner this Christian Ordinance is a standing Memorial of the Divine Philanthropy at which the Love of God in giving his everlasting Son and the Compassions of Jesus in giving up himself to die for us are solemnly Agnized and the Redemption of the whole World publickly Celebrated
of a more Noble importance and signification and so they troubled not the Lord with enquiries being sufficiently satisfied of the Nature and meaning of such solemnities And this we may suppose to have been the Reason too why we find so few directions in the Scriptures of the New Testament about preparing our selves for a worthy eating of this Blessed Sacrament For there is little or nothing said upon this Subject setting aside what Saint Paul once occasionally said of self examination in 1 Cor. 11. 28. For the thing was not so very needful because such directions might easily be drawn even from the consideration of the Nature and ends of this Holy Banquet and men already had great impressions and apprehensions of their duty in order to a due celebration of those Solemnities to which this Mystery was Parallel and Analogous With what Religion did the very Heathens prepare themselves by washing their Bodies and by abstaining from worldly and Carnal Pleasures before they addressed themselves to the Tables of their Gods And with what care and curiosity did the Jews pick every Crum of Leaven out of their houses and use other observances before they presumed to eat of the Passeover The very resemblance and Analogy between this Mystery and that is enough to minister directions about preparing and purifying our Spirits in order to it and whatsoever is necessary in that point may be easily gathered and concluded from the consideration of the Purport and reason of this Holy Rite All which is lost by mens taking no notice of that Analogy which it bears to other Sacrifical Feasts and therefore it is no wonder that the Socinians speak so coldly of this matter and that they are as superficial and slight about the business of preparation as they are slovenly Rude and irreverent at the Celebration of this Mystery These things being laid down as the Foundation and Ground-work of what I have to say upon this subject the task I have undertaken will be attended with the fewer difficulties the true notion of this Sacrament will be the more readily conceived the great errors about it will be the more easily removed the truths concerning it will be settled with the greater firmness and solidity and every thing will be apprehended I hope with the greater perspicuity and clearness which is the thing that I much aim at in this whole matter The sum briefly is this that this Christian Rite is a Sacrifical Banquet which beareth some proportionable likeness to those Sacrifical Banquets which were Religiously Celebrated of Old by the generality of mankind So that as Jews and Heathens were wont to feed upon a Sacrificed Beast so we Christians do feed upon a Sacrificed Redeemer after a Corporeal manner we feed upon the Figure of him that is we partake of Bread instead of that his Flesh which is his Natural Body but after a Spiritual manner we feed upon him Himself that is we partake of his Virtues and Divine nature which is his Spiritual Body CHAP. II. Of the Ends of this Sacrament First it is a Memorial of Christs Love proved from Christs own words From its Analogy to other Sacrifical Banquets and from the Practice of the Ancient Church Two inferences the one against Romanists the other against our Dissenters THe Nature of this Mystery being unfolded proceed we in the next place to consider the Ends and Purposes for which it was appointed 1. Now one great End is readily granted on all hands only some differ a little about rendring the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the expression in the Original 1. Some render it Recordatio as if this solemnity was intended to put men in mind of Christs passion and to bring his Love to their remembrance Nor have the Socinians sufficient reason Nisi quis antequam illuc accedat non modo rectè mortis Christi meminerit sed ejus efficaciam fructumjam interiore animo gustet ac sentiat indignus planè est qui eò accedat Socin ubi Supra to quarrel with this interpretation because as they argue men ought to remember the Lords Passion before they come to the Lords Supper 'T is true we ought to do so and 't is as true that this solemnity is a proper means to excite us to do so to engage us to sequester some time for antecedent Meditations to consider of the Divine goodness and of our own unworthiness before hand to view the several parts of our Saviours Life and sufferings and to observe the greatness of his love throughout the whole that we may come to the Holy Table with souls possest with a deep sense of God mercies and with hearts full of zeal of thankfulness of repentance and of Devotion which we are apt at other times not to be so solicitously careful of At the institution of the Passeover the Jews were commanded to take the Lamb into their houses on the tenth day of Nisan and to Keep it up until the fourteenth of the same Month Exod. 12. And one reason which the Jews give of this is that in those four days by having the Lamb under their eye they Paul Fagius in Exod 12. might be stirred up to continual considerations and conferences of their Redemption out of Egypt for which reason they have a Tradition on among them that during those four days the Lamb was tyed by a bed-side And thus do the thoughts of this Christian Feast when it is near at hand very much serve to excite men to the most serious considerations of the Redemption of all Mankind by that Lamb of God which taketh away the sins of the World And besides the breaking of the Bread and the pouring forth of the Wine together with the mention that then is made of our Lords death do abundantly serve to imprint in our minds a memory of the Passion after a most lively end efficacious manner so that it is not in any wise an Unfit or Improper way of speaking to say that this Sacrament is unto us a Remembrancer of our Duty 2. But secondly the generality of Divines render the Word as the Socinians do Commemoratio meaning that this Mystery was appointed as a Test of mens constancy that to the Worlds end they might publickly Profess their Faith in a crucified Redeemer by shewing forth their dear Lords death and by constantly celebrating the memorial of his bitter but meritorious Passion I shew'd before how the Jews were wont at their Paschal Supper to commemorate and express the joyful sense they had of the deliverance of their Nation from the Brick-Kilms and the Cruelties of the Egyptians In like manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Chrysoft in Pascha 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Non solum inter Sacrificia sed etiam in conviviis in omnibus solennitatibus antiquorum erant sermones de rebus ab illis diis gestis Nat. Com. mythol l. 1. c. 1. Inter vescendum laudes diis canere assuer
which is a word derived from an Hebrew Radix that Rab. Levi Ben Gersom Salomon Iarchi Kimchi and others cited by Dr. Outram de Sacrificiis lib. 1. c. 11. signifies to draw near because the Oblations were brought to Gods Altar and the Offerers themselves were thereby brought very nigh unto God And for the same reason divers Hebrew Doctors thought that Peace-offerings were so called because by means thereof Peace and Concord was procured and by the eating of them Confirmed between God and those who presented them Their using of one Common Table was a Token that they were in Gods Grace and Favour that Sacrifical Feast was a Symbol of Friendship between God and all the Communicants And upon the same grounds it was also that at the eating of the Peace-offerings they were wont to rojoyce before the Lord to sing Psalms and Hymns unto him signifying that they Abarbanel loc laud. were at peace with God and that God was at peace with them whereas at the Sacrificing of sin-offerings the People did use to express their Grief and Heaviness such as become Penitents abstaining from all Banquets especially those Sacrifical Banquets which their sins had occasioned for it was not fit for De hostiis Pacificis licebat post effusum sanguinem privatis qui obtulerant eorumque uxoribus liberis epulari in signum amâ—citiae cum deo Id in oblatione simulae non licebat quia id inter privilegia erat Sacerdotalia nec in victim is pro peccato delicto ne de culpa Laetarentur Grot. in Levit. 3. 1. them to rejoyce for their iniquities when the Priests did eat of their sin-offerings as they were wont to rejoyce for Gods Friendship and Kindness to them which they were assured of when they were suffered to eat themselves of their peace-offerings as the learned Grotius hath rightly observed Once more as in general the Sacrifical Feasts among the Jews were Pledges of Gods singular love to them so was the Passeover-Feast in particular The Socinians cannot deny but that at its first institution it was a visible Sign to the Jews that God would be so favourable and Gracious to them as to deliver them out of all their distresses in Egypt for Moses told them in express terms to that purpose Those Idolaters the Egyptians thought themselves sure of the good will of their Gods when they had the Priviledge to Banquet before them Therefore God himself to confirm his own people in the belief of his promise and to make them sure of it that he would infallibly redeem them with a strong hand notwithstanding all the discouragements and difficulties they saw before them ordered them to kill in each house a Lamb and to feast upon it and to be assured thereby that he would certainly deliver them even tho the Egyptians should be never so enraged to see that Creature killed which they thought it unlawful and abominable for men to slay and eat of so that as the Rainbow was a sign of Gods Covenant with Noah and as circumcision was a Token of Gods Covenant with Abraham for so the Scripture calls it expresly not only the Seal of Abrahams righteousness as the Socinians would have it but a Token of Gods Covenant too with Abraham Gen. 17. 11. even so the Passeover Feast was now a sign and Token of his Covenant with Abrahams Children In after ages it continued to be a Pledge still of the Divine favour to them and for that reason it was that no stranger no uncircumcised Man no unclean person could partake of it because being as yet out of Gods favour they were uncapable of receiving the Token the Pledge the Earnest of his Love and Goodness Seeing then that the feasting upon Sacrifices was thought by all mankind to be a Pledge and argument that Heaven was propitious to them Seeing that the feasting upon peace-offerings in general and upon the Paschal-Lamb in particular was concluded by the Jews to be a Pledge and argument of Gods special love to them above all other Nations it evidently followeth that this our feasting upon Christ our Sacrifice this our Eating of Bread instead of his Natural Flesh this our Christian Sacrifical Banquet being Analogous and answerable to the Sacrifical Banquets of Old ought also to be looked upon as those were to be a Token Pledge and Seal of Gods favour goodness and grace to us though the Scriptures had not told us any thing to that effect in express terms But in my opinion St. Paul hath said enough to this purpose if men will but attentively listen to what he saith in 1 Cor. 10. where part of his business is to shew how unlawful it is for Christians to Eat of things that are offered unto Idols And this he doth by shewing the incongruity and inconsistency of the thing and the Evil effects of it because every professor of Christianity doth hereby make himself a most wretched Bankrupt and undoes all his interest in Christ and throws away an inestimable stock and Treasure of Blessings by his sitting at meat in the Idols Temple To make this out he shews in few words what those Blessings are The Cup of blessing which we bless is it not the Communion of the blood of Christ The Bread which we break is it not the Communion Though some Socinians interpret those words as if by the Communion of Christs Body and blood was meant the making and causing us to be of that Society or Church which belongs to Christs Body and Blood which is a very Trissing and far fetch interpretation as Slichtingius in 1 Cor. 10. 16. Yet in the Socinian Catechism they own and confess that such as ducly Celebrate this Rite do Communicate of Christs Body and Blood that is say they of all those good things which Christ hath brought tous by his Death though they trifle again in saying that this Rite is not any cause but only an Attestation of that Communion of the Body of Christ ver 16. were part of the Apostles meaning is this that by rightly receiving the Symbols of Christs Body and Blood we have a share in all those Blessings for which his Body was broken and his Blood was shed We have a Title Claim and Right thereby to all the Mercies of the new Covenant we receive the Vertues and wonderful effects of his Passion and so we are understood in a Mystical sense to participate of Christs Body and Blood 'T is true we do here partake of Christ not mystically only but really too we participate not only of his Bruised and Crucified but also of his most Blessed and Glorified Body as I shall shew at large hereafter in its proper place But that is not to our purpose now Though we do Communicate of Christ now while he is in Heaven yet in the place before quoted St. Paul doth directly point to those blessings which by means of this Sacrament accrue to us from his sufferings on the
man finds himself named in Gods promise but to all Believers in general Now as it was necessary that the Divine Grace should be first purchased for all at large and then some means used for the conveyance of this purchase to every individual Believer so is it necessary that besides the confirmation and sealing of the promises by Christs Death to all in general there should be another obsignation to the Soul of every person in particular that gives up himself to him that died for him because otherwise every ones mind would fluctuate in endless doubtings and uncertainties Now we say that this obsignation is transacted at this Covenant-Feast And how so Why here every particular Communicant that is duly prepared receives the Seal when he receives the Elements which are the Tokens and Pledges upon the Divine favour In that I am admitted to participate here of the Sacrifice of the Cross it is an evident sign and strong argument to me that that Sacrifice shall be imputed to me shall be available and effectual for me as the Sacrifice was imputed to the Jews was available and effectual for the Jews and was declared to be so when they were admitted to partake of the Peace-offerings and to feast upon them as we do here upon Bread and Wine CHAP. VI. Of the blessings we receive by a due use of this Ordinance First we Mystically participate of Christs Body and Blood What that Mystical participation is Secondly that we receive the Pardon of Sin Proved from the correspondency of this Feast to the Ancient Sacrifical Banquets in general And from its Analogy to those Feasts which were used after Sin-offerings in particular and from the words of Christ at the Institution HAving thus discoursed of the Nature and Ends of this Sacrament I proceed next according to the usual method to discourse of the Blessings which it brings us by our due Reception of it 1. And first it is the joynt Confession of all the Christian Churches in the world for I do not reckon upon the Blasphemous Socinians that we do hereby receive the Body and Blood of our Redeemer This I mention in the first place and must take the greater care and pains to clear because the proof hereof will strongly and evidently prove the conveyance of divers other blessings hereafter to be mentioned in their order Now we are said to partake of Christs Body and Blood in a twofold sense that is after a Mystical and after a real manner 1. In a Mystical sense we do partake here of our Saviours Body as it was Broken and of his Blood as it was shed for us upon the Cross that is our Feasting together at the Holy Table is by interpretation a feeding upon our Crucified Jesus in the account of God and construction of the Gospel We are reputed and esteemed to partake of that Sacrifice which he offered up and so are entitled to all those mercies which that Sacrifice was offered up for For the opening of this matter we must remember how Mankind were wont of old to participate of those things which they had first offered up in Sacrifice as the Jews for instance were wont to participate of their Peace-offerings and of the Paschal Lamb. Now this Feast being Analogous and answerable to those according to the Vulgar course and the Ordinary manner of Feasting Christians must have fed upon Their Sacrifice that is upon Christs own Natural Flesh as Jews and Gentiles were wont to seed upon their Oblations But considering that this would have been an * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Cyril Alexand in Catena Thomae in Luc. 22. vide e◠ad Calofyr Item Theophylact in Marc 14. Inhumane way of feasting and considering that one and the same Body could not have served 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athanas in illud quicunque dixerit verbum c. for all Christians in all Ages and considering too that the feeding upon Christs very Flesh was not necessary in it self but that the ends and purposes of this Feast might be very well answer'd by our feeding upon something else in the Place of Christ therefore at the institution of this Ordinance he appointed us the use of Bread and Wine instead of giving us his very Body and Blood which he gave to God as a Sacrifice for us These Creatures are the Symbols and Representations of his Body and Blood they are substituted in the place and room of them and the manducation of the one and the drinking of the other is to all intents as valid and effectual to us as if we did actually partake of those things which they do represent and in lieu of which they are appointed This I take to be part of the meaning of our Saviours words this is my Body and this is my Blood As if he had said this Bread is instead of my Flesh and this Wine is in the Room of my blood This is a Natural and an easie interpretation 't is fair and rational and full of sense and 't would serve to silence a great many controversies among Christians were it but admitted would they put in but this one word instead and understand our Saviour to mean this is instead of that in the place and room of it Nor do I see any reason in the World against this interpretation For all men know that the Jews were wont to speak after a concise manner meaning something which they did not fully express of which there are a thousand instances and examples in Holy Writ and why may we not allow that our Saviour spake now as other Jews did nay as he himself did at other times after a short concise manner saying of the Bread this is my Body but intending thus much This is instead of my Body The Analogy of this Feast to other Sacrifical Banquets doth plainly and infallibly argue that our Saviours words are thus to be interpreted because we feed here upon Bread instead of eating the very Flesh of our Sacrifice And I am confirmed in this opinion by an observation that Bishop Taylor of the real presence Sect. 4. in fine And Dr. Hammond in his Annot on Matth. 26. 26. hath been made by two learned Doctors of our Church who have noted that the Lamb for the Paschal Supper being drest and set upon the Table the Jews were wont to call it the Body of the Passeover and the Body of the Paschal Lamb. If this be so it is reasonable to believe that our Saviour alluded to a Jewish Phrase that was ready at hand when he said this is my Body or this is in the room of me the true Passeover When he took the Bread into his Holy hands and told his Disciples that that was his Body he gave them to understand that they were not to expect to eat of his very Natural Flesh as they were wont to eat of the Flesh of a Lamb but instead of that they were to eat Bread which should be as
though no such thing hath been allowed hitherto at any Sacrifical Solemnity Which shews that our whole Sacrifice is fully imputed to every worthy Communicant for his forgiveness Dr. Patricks Menfa Myst cap. 4. 5. 3. and as a Learned Man hath well observed that we are fully justified by Christ from all those things which we could not be justified from by the Law of Moses 3. Thus the Analogy of this Sacrifical Banquet doth prove that every worthy partaker thereof hath the strongest and most substantial reasons to hope in God firmly and to depend upon Gods goodness and promise for his Pardon But thirdly the words of our Saviour himself do seem to argue this beyond all manner of controversie though the Socinians endeavour to Evade the force of them For speaking of the Cup he said expresly Drink ye all of it for this is my Blood of the new Covenant which is shed for many for the Remission of Sins Though it be granted what the Socinians object that those words for the Remission of Sins do immediately relate to the shedding of Christs Blood which was spoken of just before yet they endeavour in vain to Lud. Wolzogenius in Loc. conclude thence that they have no reference to the drinking of the Cup. Nor have they reason enough to affirm that Remission of sins is the fruit of Christs Passion only but not the effect of our drinking because he said not drink ye all for the Remission of Sins but drink ye of the Wine that represents my Blood which is shed for the Remission of sins For since our forgiveness is the certain immediate and necessary consequence of his sufferings it will undeniably follow that it we participate of his Blood as I have shew'd we do we must be supposed to partake also of that which is the inseparable effect of his Blood shedding That which brings the cause must also bring the effect which is the Natural result of it The same action which makes us partakers of the Sacrifice it self must likewise make us partakers of the fruit and Benefit of the Sacrifice So that it matters not how our Saviour exprest the thing as long as he exprest it enough Since he first tells us that his Blood was for our Remission and then bids us to Drink of that Blood and then assures us that our drinking thus of Wine is in effect the drinking of his very Blood we have all the reason in the World to believe that by our thus drinking we obtain Remission and that our Lord commanded us to drink in Order thereunto The truth is Pardon of sin is the Blessed fruit both of Christs dying and of our receiving Of the former as the meritorious Cause that purchased pardon for all in general Of the latter as the ordinary instrument that conveys the pardon to every Holy Soul in particular The shedding of Christs Blood did procure and ratifie Gods promise of Grace to all Mankind and the receiving of this Wine which is the Symbol of that Blood is the Seal of that promise to all worthy Communicants when Christ was slain upon the Cross he obtained this favour of God that all Men were then put into a salvable condition into a Capacity of forgiveness into a way whereby they might be pardoned actually and fully if they would not be wanting to themselves perfect Peace and reconciliation was then merited and it was merited for all that should accept of it whether Jews or Gentiles bond or free for he tasted Death for every Man Heb. 2. 9. He died for all that were dead 2 Cor. 5. 14. Thus far the Scripture speaketh in general terms but it saith nothing of Me or of Thee as to our particular Persons We find not our names there much less can we find our Names in the book of Eternity All that we can do is to judge of our selves by examining our state by fair probabilities and rational Collection And to strengthen our hopes and to establish every mans humble confidence this Ordinance was appointed that as offen as we eat this Bread and drink this Cup of the Lord after a worthy manner we may be comfortably and reasonably well perswaded that our sins and transgressions are done away For that pardon is by this Ordinance applyed to every one in particular which before was bought for all universally and any man that is but satisfied of the truth of his Faith and of the sincerity of his Repentance may go away from the Holy Table well satisfied to that he now stands fair in the eye and favour of God and so shall stand still if he doth but hold up his goings in Gods ways so that his footsteps do not slide back into Sin and Perdition I hope that by this time I have fully proved and illustrated this matter But yet before I let it go I would note this one thing that our Saviour spake expresly of the Remission of our sins when he spake of the administration of the Cup. Neither of the three Evangelists who have recorded the History of the institution of this Mystery nor St. Paul who hath repeated it takes any notice of that expression when our Lord spake of the distribution of the Bread Indeed it is not to be doubted but our Saviours Body was broken for our forgiveness nor do I doubt but his meaning was so when he said this is my body which is given for you that is for your Atonement and Pardon but that particular expression touching the Remission of Sin was used by him for ought we know only in reference to the Drinking of the Wine Hence I infer that for the Peace of a Mans Conscience and for the satisfaction of his mind that he is in an hopeful state of Salvation it is necessary for him to receive the Sacrament in both kinds Seeing forgiveness of sin is the effect of the whole Ordinance seeing our Saviour seems to have a particular and special regard to our drinking of the Cup and seeing he gives us this reason for it because it is the Sacrament of his blood that is for our Remission I say seeing that the thing standeth thus I cannot see what substantial and solid grounds men can have to be confident of their Pardon if they participate not of the Wine as well as of the Bread If the thing were not prejudicial to the Peace of mens Souls yet it would be impossible to Vindicate the Church of Rome from the guilt of Impiety Sacriledge and Innovation for Denying the Cup to all the Lay-People of her Communion For the Holy Jesus himself administred both the Bread and the Wine to his Disciples and as He had done he commanded them to do also nay as if he then fore-saw and was minded to prevent that abuse which hath lately crept into the Roman Church he Positively commanded his Disciples when he reached out the Cup to them that they should All drink of it and his Reason was this because his Bloud of
which the wine was a Figure was now to be shed for the Forgiveness of All. So that were this argument driven home upon the Romanists they must be brought to confess if they will speak out either that the Cup is to be given to Lay-people or else that Christs blood was not shed for Lay-peoples Sins I will not enter into that enquiry how many and what the persons were to whom our Saviour spake at that time Though some are ready to tell us that they were only the twelve Apostles who were then in the quality of Priests yet this is a confident assertion which we need not grant For though it be said that he sate down with the twelve yet it doth not follow that no more than twelve were there It is probable that the good man of the House who is supposed to have been a Believer might be there among the rest at least it is improbable that the Holy Virgin of whom he took such care at his Death should not be with him at his last Supper especially since he admitted the Traitor Judas But suppose none but the twelve were Communicants yet they were the representatives of the whole Church and what he said unto them he must be understood to have spoken in reference unto All that every Member of his Family should drink of the Cup as well as eat of the Bread Accordingly was the practice of all Christians in the days of old Wheresoever St. Paul speaks of the administration of this Sacrament he speaks of both Elements that they were communicated of and this he saith was that which he had received of the Lord 1 Cor. 11. 21. And that the same was the usage of the times following is undeniably clear out of the writings of many antient Fathers both of Greek and Latine Churches who Celebrated this Mystery as we do which I note the rather that I may lay open those Lyars who to palliate their corruptions confidently tell poor ignorant people this Monstrous falsity that Antiquity is on their side This their custome of half-Communion is a most Notorious Innovation and the general practice of it was never authoriz'd till that blessed Assembly of Divines forsooth at Constance about the year 1415. and yet those very men though they were so bold as Licet Christus post Caenam Instituerit suis Discipulis ad ministraverit sub utraque specie panis vini hoc venerabile Sacramentum tamen hoc non obstante c. Et similiter licet in Primitiva Ecclesia hujusmodi Sacramentum reciperetur a fidelibus sub utraque specie tamen c. Praecipimus sub paena excommunicationis quod nullus Presbyter communicer populum sub utraque specie panis vini Concil Constans Sess 13. acknowledged by their own Caranza Sum. Concil p. 626. to appoint Communion under one kinde onely yet they were so ingenuous as to confess that the thing was contrary to Christs Institution and that the custome of the Primitive Church had been to the contrary also Hoc tamen non obstante as they then declared not withstanding all this they prohibited the administration of the Cup to the Lay-people But whether their Prohibition or our Saviours Institution and the custome of the old Catholick Church ought to take place let the indifferent world consider Indeed 't is no news to hear of the Dishonesty of the Roman Clergy there are so many palpable instances of their soul dealing with the world But 't is an unaccountable injury they do to mens Souls to defraud them of that by a due reception whereof we receive the remission of our Sins And though Bellarmine and the rest have taught them to come off with this Pretence that the whole Christ is in each part of the Sacrament and so that the very Bloud of Christ is even in the wafer yet this is a groundless suggestion and untruth at least it is too vain an imagination for men to trust to in a case of such vast Importance and Concernment For they themselves do confess that the a In una specie non habetur perfectè integrè Sacrificii ratio sed utraque necessaria est c. Bellarm. de Sacram-Euchar lib. 4. c. 22. Sacrifice of the Mass as they call it is not perfect without both Kinds b So Alexander Alensis Gaspar Cassalius and Ruardus as Bellarmine doth confess ubi Supr c. 23. And some of their Doctors have declared their Opinion that there is less spiritual benefit by Half Communion and the Learned c Objicit Georgius CassAnder quòd Sancti patres tribuunt peculiarem effectum sanguini domini qui ex Calice sumitur sic enim Ambrosius Ioquitur si lib. 5. de Sacram. c. 3. Quotiescunque bibis Remissionem accipis peccatorum inebriaris Spiritu Et Cyprianus lib. 1. Ep. 2. Quomodo docemus aut provocamus eos in comfessiore nominis sanguinem suum fundere si eis inibitaturis Christi Sanguinem denegamus Id. ibid. Cassander objected justly that the Ancient Doctors of the Christian Church laid a great deal of stress upon the administration of the Chalice ascribing a peculiar efficacy to the Sacrament of our Lords Bloud not but that his Body is the means of our Justification too but because our Saviour Dignified the Cup after a peculiar manner saying this is my Bloud of the New Co. venant which is shed for the Remission of fins I wish therefore that the deceived members of that Church would consider this seriously 'T would be enough to make their Hearts ake to think how their Hopes of the forgiveness of their Sins are wonderfully weakened by this Unchristian practice It would be a wonder how any of the Laity among the Romanists could enjoy one quiet hour in their lives or ever go to bed in Peace and with any tolerable Satisfaction especially such of them as are Conseious to themselves of those flagitious Crimes they have acted did they but sadly consider what a miserable case they are in Were there nothing else to frighten them but this that they confidently Trust to a few fruitless Absolutions which onely keep up a Market but are Deprived of that which to penitent Souls is a Certain instrument of Pardon Blessed be God that we lye in the bosome of a Church which administreth to all her devout children the Seals of Gods mercy according to her Lords own mind and appointment and agreeably to the way of the Catholick Church And as this should set all our desires upon the wing and make us fly on every occasion to the Holy Table that our wearyed Souls may find a Resting place and Sure footing so should it replenish us with Comfort and Joy of Heart when we go away being fully assured of Gods purposes of Grace towards us and being satisfied in a good measure that we are now in a Happy condition 'T is true before men go to the Sacrament they ought to be well satisfied of Gods merciful
would be whole and not whole These and the like are everlasting and certain principles which all men that will obey common reason must agree in and they are taught us both in Christian and Heathen Philosophy as common Notions and Maxims as fixt and clear as that one and one makes two So that to contradict these principles is to tell Mankind that they are all mad-men and fools that are not able to tell their Fingers And yet these principles are contradicted by the Doctrine of Transubstantiation which is made up of I know not how many impossibilites which we can no more reconcile to reason than we can prove that the same proposition is both true and false in the same respect and that man who believes that Doctrine must believe the grossest and most palpable contradictions For according to this rate these monstrous Absardities will follow that Christs Humane flesh is Circumscribed in Heaven as every body must be confined to a certain place and yet at the same time is in millions of places here on Earth and yet one Body still That it is whole and yet is broken That it is divided and yet is entire that it is entire in every Wafer and yet if you break those Wafers into a thousand particles that the body of Christ is one still and whole in every the least particle That tho there be feet and hands and head and many other constituent and integral parts in Christs body and tho all these parts are the one without the other and by the other and distinct from the other yet that all are so jumbled and crowded together into a point that whosoever eateth but a piece that is no bigger than a Pins point eateth all and every part of Christs body And many more such contradictions there are so wild so irrational so inconsistent with common sense that 't is as tiresome to count them up as to tell the number of the Stars Further yet Thirdly we find by experience that what we eat and drink at the Communion doth serve for Nourishment 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Justin Mart. Apol. 2. Quomodo dicunt carnem in corruptionem devenire non percipere vitam que a corpore Domini Sanguine alitur Subaud Symbolico Irer adv Haeres l. 4. c. 34. * it recruites the spirits and helps to repair the expences of Nature and they tell us of King Lewis that he lived 40 days together onely by the food which he had from the Holy Table and without question any man may sustain himself a Considerable time onely by the use of the Sacred Viands provided he receive a Convenient Quantity Now we desire a Rational answer to this Inquiry what is it that nourisheth a man in this case If they say it is Christs Body and Bloud Naturally understood and Corporally taken it is Blasphemy for then it may feed a Reprobate aswell as a Saint and a Jew aswell as a Christian nay what if some Unclean Beast should happen to light on it The Consequences thereof would be such are as enough to strike the Heart of any good Christian with Horrour but to hear them mentioned If they say it is the Species the Accidents of Bread and Wine that nourisheth without the Substance of either it is down right Non-sense And they were as good say that a Body can be sustained with a shaddow or that a man may Live upon a shew which is not so much as Air or that he may be fed by Dreaming specially if he Dream as Pharaoh's Baker did of three Baskets upon his Head full of all manner of Meats or that he may Quench his Thirst and Refresh his Spirits only by Looking upon Grapes nay though he mistake Paint for Reality as those Birds did which flew to the Picture of a Vine which Zeuxes had drawn supposing that they were Natural and Real Clusters Either they must grant that to be Bread and Wine which they feel in their Stomachs and find Refreshment and Strength from or else they must say we Trust too much to Sense and Reason and then they cannot blame us but by allowing sense and Reason to be on our side a Crime which I wish all Romanists were guilty of in every Particular To all which I add in the 4th Place that the outward parts of the Sacrament are Subject to many Alterations and Changes which without Loathsomness and Abhorrence we cannot conceive to be incident to the Blessed Body and Bloud of our Redeemer the Lord of Glory The solid part is torn in pieces with our Teeth and if men have stronger Stomachs than the Capernaites who could not away with the thoughts of eating Humane Flesh or if they can endure to go beyond the Cannibals who were wont to eat their Enemies Flesh only yet we have Reason to wonder how they can rellish the thoughts of out going the most Barbarous Pagans who ever had more Reverence and Veneration for that they Worshipt than to Devour such things as they took to be Deities Yet thus the Romanists do not stick to do for which reason Averroes would not become a Christian but when he saw some of that denomination to Eat that which they Adored as their God he cryed out with Indignation Let my Soul rather venture its Lot and take its portion with the old Philosophers Again the Bread may grow Mouldy may Corrupt may bread Worms and stink for which cause Hesychius tells us of some Christians formerly Hesych in Levit. that their custome was to Burn the Remaining Surplusage of the Sacrament Nay it may be stoln away by a Mouse as sometimes it hath been since People came to be so Superstitious as to Reserve it and to secure it from the like chance and from the Vermines teeth the Romanists are wont to keep it shut up close in a Pix So also the Liquid part in the Cup may Intoxicate the Brain being immoderately taken it may be prickt and become Eager through negligence and many accidents more 't is Subject unto which without abomination we cannot conceive can happen to the Holy Bloud of our Saviour Nay both the outward Elements may be Bellarm. de Euch. lib. 3. c. 24. mixed with Poyson and Peter Martyr well objected against the Papists neither doth Cardinal Bellarmine positively deny the truth of the Stories that Pope Victor the 3d. and the Emperour Henry the 7th were both of them poysoned with the Sacrament In a word our Saviour himself hath told us S. Matth. 15. 17. that whatsoever entreth in at the mouth goeth into the Belly and is cast out into the Draught Origen doth positively affirm the same thing of the Quod si quickquid ingreditur in os in ventrem abit in secessum ejicitur ille cibus qui Sanctificatur per verbum Dei perque obsecrationem juxta id quod habet materiale in ventrem abit in secessum ejicitur Et haec quidem de Typico Symbolicoque corpore
Declaration of their Church probably they would have been contented that those words at the Institution should have born such a construction as would not have shook the Reason of men so notoriously 2. If we frame notions of things just according to the clink of a Phrase we must needs entertain very strange apprehensions of our Saviour himself because he is usually called a Lamb a Lyon a Shepherd a Rock a Door a Way a Vine and the like 3. As Christ saith here This is my Body so in Job 6. he saith also that he is the Bread of life and that his Flesh is Meat and his Bloud Drink He speaks as plainty and positively in the one place as he doth in the other Now if men affirm that the bread is changed into Christs Flesh because Christ saith positively This is my Body they have equally the same reason to affirm that Christs Flesh is turned into Bread and his Bloud into Drink because he said as positively My Flesh is meat indeed and my Bloud Drink indeed A latitude must be allowed to be as to the sense of those expressions or else men must fall into a Labyrinth of absurdities and contradictions which they can never wind themselves out of by the help of any clue 4. If we observe what our Saviour said to the Capernaites upon the like occasion we cannot but conclude that his meaning at both times was mystical The story we have in the 6th of S. John verily verily saith our Lord except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of man and drink his bloud ye have no life in you vers 53. This seem'd a very Harsh expression because they conceived as the Romanists do now that Christ intended his Flesh should be torn in pieces with their Teeth and that his Natural bloud should be suckt out of his veins with their mouths The bare apprehension of this matter turn'd their stomachs so that they were scandaliz'd presently and fell off from him Therefore to rectifie their mistakes he expounded himself telling them that they were not to understand him in a literal and carnal sense no the words that I speak unto you they are Spirit and they are life vers 63. meaning that he spake Mystically and that they were to interpret So that place was understood by the Ancients his words after a Spiritual manner and of a Spiritual and Divine way of feeding upon him and so we feed upon Christ who laughd at the Doctrine of Transubstantiation and so all good Christians fed upon him for many hundreds of years before that Doctrine was dreamt of or thrown about to debauch and intoxicate the world CHAP. VIII The Doctrine of Transubstantion inconsistent with and contrary to the Doctrine of the Primitive Church Proved by five Observations touching the common sense of Christian in the most ancient times A short account of the Doctrine of the Church in succeeding Ages till the twelfth Century 3. 'T Is true the Papists are wont to crack of Tradition and Antiquity as if all the ancient Fathers of the Catholick Church were on their side And nothing hath prevailed more with ordinary people to turn or continue Papists than an opinion that Transubstantiation was all along the Faith of the Christian Church I confess I wonder much that common people will pretend to be judges in this case when they understand little of Greek or Latine much less have skill to tell which of the Books that are ascribed to the Fathers are Genuine and which are supposititious But alass they are taught by their leaders to believe any thing and to talk by Rote like a sort of men among our selves who are readily perswaded to act any thing that is for the Cause for the Cause for their darling and dearly beloved Cause though they venture their Necks and their very Souls for an evil cause sake Therefore to clear this matter fully we will once for all try the point by unquestionable authorities and examine particularly what the sense of the Christian Church was chiefly in the Primitive times and ex abundanti in the times following And I am fouly mistaken if we do not find upon the whole enquiry that Tradition which the Romanists brag of so much is plainly against them for above a thousand years In the prosecution of this thing I beg leave to go a little out of the common rode not to trouble my self with an endless fatigue of collecting a world of sentences out of the Fathers a course which tho it be proper enough for a Disputant yet may be liable to a great many Cavils I shall rather chuse to argue from some observations that may be made upon those Controversies the Ancient Church had with Infidels and Hereticks which will evidently shew the sense of the Ancient Christians as to the point under our hands for this is certain that we can never better learn the sense of the Ancient Church than out of their Disputations especially when they go upon the same grounds and use the same way of Argumentation 1. Now first it is easie to observe what the sense of the Ancient Church was as to the eating of Humane Flesh and the drinking of Bloud The Pagans were wont for a long time to throw this in the teeth of the Primitive Christians that they celebrated Thyestean banquets and stories ran about that at their sacred Assemblies they killed a Child and then junketed together upon the tragical dish The Christians granted that the feasting upon Humane Flesh and Bloud was a most Barbarous and Flagitious crime but they proved themselves Innocent they abominated the very thoughts of any such detestable practice and in all their Apologies they declared their utter Abhorrence thereof so Justin Martyr in the Age next to the Apostles then Tatian after him Athenagoras and Theophilus Justin Martyr 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. Apolog. 2. Tatian Orat. cont Graec. P. 162. Athenagor legat pro Christian P. 4. 35 36. c. Theophil ad Autol. lib. 3 P. 119. 126. Tertullian Apologet. cap. 9. Origen cont Cels l. 6. P. 302. Minut. Felix in Octavio the Patriarch of Antioch After these Tertullian after him Origen and after him Minutus Faelix For an hundred years together were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Theop. ad Autolyc the Primitive Christians busie in vindicating themselves from that Atheistical and Savage Practice as Theophilus calls it of eating mans flesh And to make this evidently appear the ancient Christians did appeal to their very Enemies who could not but know that some Christians were wont to refrain from all flesh whatsoever that none of them would taste of that which was strangled or which was destroyed Tantum ab Humano sanguine cavemus ut nec edulium pecorum in cibis sanguinem noverimus Minut. Felix P. 34. Denique inter tentament a Christianorum botulos cruore distentos admovetis certissimi scilicet illicitum esse penes illos c. Tertull. Apol. c.
the same heresies and even he draws one of his Arguments from the blessed Eucharist likewse and he is as Positive as can be that the Body of Christ meaning the Symbolical Body as Origen In Photii Biblioth cod 229. called it that is the Bread which is received by the Faithful doth not depart out of its sensible Substance and Nature and yet remaines undivided from the Spiritual Grace and to clear his meaning fully he shews in the very next words that the Elements in the Eucharist are no more changed than the water is in Baptism which Remaineth still water after Sanctification Thus these four Great men S. Chrysostome Theodoret Gelasius and Ephraim delivered the Sense of the Catholick Church in their times and if you add them to the forementioned Fathers who lived in the Primitive times before them it will be manifest beyond exception that for above 500 years together after Christ the Christian Doctors did no more believe the Elements in the Sacrament to be Transubstantiated into Christ's Flesh and Bloud than they did believe the Manhood of Christ himself to be Transubstantiated into his God-head or his God-head to be abolisht and turned into his Humanity Now the sense of Christians in those ages ought to satisfie the minds of Christians in these for certainly the faith of Christ was never more clearly more Learnedly more solidly maintained than in the first five Centuries and one reason of it as I conceive was this because Heresies of all sorts were then so very thick and Numerous the Providence of God permitting it so to be that the zeal of good men might be exercised continually whereby it came to pass that the Doctors of the Church were industrious and learned and the true faith was throughly sifted and establisht for so it is ever that as evil manners in the State are the occasion of good Laws so evil Doctrines in the Church are the occasion of Sound and Excellent Definitions I do not wonder if in the following ages we have not such great Plenty of witnesses to appeal to They were times wherein learning did much Decay and mens Industry and zeal were much abated for want of those Incentives which had formerly been like goads in the sides of the holy Fathers and I remember what Boniface the Martyr said of the times he lived in that whereas Golden Priests were formerly forced to use wooden Chalices Then wooden Priests did use Chalices of Gold And yet we may well be Astonisht at their Monstrous confidence who tell us that Transubstantiation was believed in those declining times If it had been so indeed the Argument from it would have Signified nothing because there can be no Prescription against truth and the sense of some in latter ages ought not carry the cause against the general Judgement of the Primitive and best times But in good earnest upon the strictest search I can make I do not find any grounds for the credit of the present Romish Doctrine either in * Unus idemque secundum humanam substantiam absens caelo cum esset in terra dereliquens terram cum ascendisset in caelum Secundum divinam verò immensamque substantiam nec caelum dimittens cum de caelo descendit nec terram deserens cum ad caelum ascendit c. Fulgent ad Trasimud l. 2. c. 17. Fulgentius or in Christi sanguis non jam in manus infidelium sed in or a fidelium funditur Gregor apud Gratian. de Consec dist 2. c. 73. Mysterium est quod aliud videtur aliud intelligitur Quod videtur speciem habet corporalem quod intelligitur fructum babet spiritualem sed cum Mysterium sit unde corpus sanguis Christi dicitur Consulens ommipotens Deus infirmitati nostrae qui non habemus usum comedere carnem crudam Sanguinem bibere facit ut in pristina remaneant forma illa duo munera est in veritate Corpus Christe Sanguis Id. in Glossa ex Alcuino ibdi Gregory the Great who lived in the sixth Century or in * Christus in caelum ascendens discessit quidem carne sed presens est majestate c. Isid Hisp Sentent lib. 1. Sacrificium dictum quasi sacrum factum quia prece mystica consecratur in memoriam pro nobis Dominicae passionis Unde hoc eo jubente corpus Christi sanginem dicimus quod dum fit ex Fructibus terrae sanctificatur fit Sacramentum operante invisibiliter Spititu Dei Id. Origin lib. 6. c. 19. Isidore Hispalensis who flourisht in the seventh or in venerable Finitis veteris Paschae solenniis quae in commemorationem antiquae de Egypto liberation is agebantur transit in novum quod in suae redemptionis memoriam Ecclesia frequent are desiderat ut videlicet pro agni carne sanguine suae carnis sanguinisque Sacramentum in panis ac vini figura substituens c Beda in Luc. 22. Panis ac Vini Creatura in Sacramentum carnis sanguinis Christi ineffabili Spiritus sanctificatione transfertur sicque corpus sanguis illius non infidelium manibus ad perniciem ipsorum funditur occiditur sed fidelium ore sumitur asl salutem Id. Homil. de Sanctis Bede who was in the eighth Age no not in Damascen himself neither tho he be brought forth by the Romanists as a Champion on their side The Learned Arch Bishop Cranmer hath drawn up the sense of Damascen into this sum that the Bread and Wine are not so changed into the flesh and bloud of Christ that they be made one Nature but they remain still distinct in Nature so that the Bread in it self is not his flesh nor the Wine his blood but unto them that worthily eat and drink the bread and Wine to them the bread and Wine be his flesh and blood that is to say by things natural and which they be accustomed unto they be exalted unto things above Nature For the Sacramental bread and Wine are not bare and naked figures but so Pithy and effectuous that whosoever worthily eateth them eateth spiritually Christs flesh and blood Wherefore saith the Holy Martyr they that gather out of Damascen either the natural presence of Christs body in the Sacraments of bread and Wine or the Adoration of the outward and visible Sacrament or that after Consecration there remaineth no bread nor Wine nor other substance but only the substance of the body and Blood of Christ either they understand not Damascen or else of wilful frowardness they will not understand him which rather seemeth to be true by such collections as they have unjustly gathered and noted out of him For Damascen saith plainly that as a burning coal is not wood only but fire and wood joyned together so the bread of the Communion is not bread only but bread joyned to the Divinity He that desires further satisfaction as to this may peruse the whole vindication of Damascen in the
so much of Tradition They that had the management of the Belgick Index were somewhat more modest for they profest they would use all arts to Extenuate and excuse Bertrams errors and to put some convenient sense to them or by some device or other tell a lye for him and they were content that his Book should be mutilated and some things purged and taken away from it this I say was more modest usage then what poor Beriram received at the hands of the Other Censors and yet this was very dishonest too and a plain Sign of a very weak cause that needed such disingenuous Artifices So they might have dealt with Amalarius too the Archbishop of Triers in the same age who trod in the steps of S. Austin affirming Amalar. de Ecclesii Offic. l. 3. c. 25. the Elements to represent Christs Body and Bloud as Signes of things and that the Priest offereth up Bread and Wine instead of Christ and that the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament are in the Place and Room of Christ Body and Bloud T is true Paschasius Rabertus who lived at the same time differed much in his opinion from these great men though it be hard to tell what his opinion was so very Inconsistent was the man with himself as it usually happens to Heady Opiniators especially when they are on the wrong side and will be venturing upon new discoveries This is allowed that Paschasius had a Notion by himself but I think if it be searcht well into it will be found to come nearer to the Lutheran Doctrine of Consubstantiation Paschas de Euchar. c. 41. 13. then to the Romish Conceit For since he affirm'd as Rabanus did that Christ is not to be torn with mens teeth that because it was necessary for Christ to be in heaven he lest us this Sacrament to be the visible Figure and Character of his Flesh and Bloud that we drink of Christ Spiritually and that we eat his Spiritual Flesh and the like whether do these Expression and Notions tend but to destroy the fancy of eating Christs Natural Body after a gross manner as the Doctrine of Transubstantiation doth import In the 10th Century we meet with Theo-phylact who spake of the Sacrament in a Lofty strain as many others before him did and used the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to express the Mutation of the Elements Which Expression the Romanists greedily catcht hold of as if he intended the changing of things out of one Substance into another But this is very wide of Theophylacts meaning who plainly intended not a Real Essential change of the Substance and Nature of the Bread and Wine but a Mystical and Sacramental change of their Quality and Condition so that upon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Justin Martyr Apolog. 2 -Qui est e terrâ Panis percipiens invocationem Dei jam non communis panis est sed Eucharistie ex duabus rebus constans c. Iren. adv Har. l. 4. c. 34. Consecration they are no longer Common things as Justin Martyr and Ireneus said of old but the Elements of Divine things unto us so that thereby the Divine body of Christ is communicated to every Holy Soul The learned Cranmer explains him rightly that as hot and burning Iron is Iron still so Defenc. lib. 3. the Sacramental bread and Wine remain bread and Wine still tho to every worthy Communicant they be turned into the Virtue of Christs flesh and blood And that this was the sense of Theophylact is clear from his own words that the kind or substance of Bread remaining and continuing a Transelementation is made in Theophylact in Marc. 14. to the Virtue of Christs Flesh which notion I shall explain hereaster In the mean time I desire the Reader to note once for all that the Romanists to support their new Doctrine of Transubstantiation have grosly abused the ancient Writers of the Church by rendring the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Species as if they signified no more then shew and appearance And this they call the accidents of the Bread and Wine which they grant to remain but without the Natural substance or essence of them so that mens senses are cousened as to the things which they see Whereas the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among the Greeks signifieth not the appearance or shew but the sort and kind of a thing and when it relates to things of matter as Bread and Wine it signifies the Essence or substance of those things And thus the words form likeness and fashion are used by St. Paul himself in the second of Philippians at the seventh Verse where speaking of our Saviour he saith that he took upon him the form of a Servant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Phil 2. 7. and was made in the likeness of Men being found in fashion as a Man Meaning that he was really in a servile Condition and a Man in substance essence and Nature In like manner the word species among the Latines signifies the sort the kind the substance of the thing and being spoken of the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament it signifies the very natural Essence or matter not barely the appearance of the Elements And this is the true meaning of Theophylact in this place where he saith that God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth preserve the kind the Essence the substance of the Bread and Wine but doth Transelementate or change them into the Virtue of Flesh and Blood However we grant that this expression of Theophylacts gave occasion though wrongfully to the School men in after Ages to lose their time in enquiring after the manner of that change which is consest to be in the Elements But even they were divided in their opinions so that the poin was not agreed upon for some time after Theophylact. For until the controversie arose about Berengarius which was towards the end of the eleventh Century it was matter of Dispute some being of one opinion and some of another They were only agreed in this that Christ is really present in the Sacrament but they could not tell how But Berengarius raised a dust which blinded other mens eyes and his own too His true Crime seems to me to have been this not that he erroneously disputed about the manner of Christs presence but that he denied him to So his Schooll-fellow Adelmannus chargeth him in an Epistle to him which Is yet extant in the Bibliotheca Patrum wherein speaking of the Novel Doctrine which was reported to have been spread abroad by him he saith hoc est ut illorum dictis utar non esse verum corpùs Christi neque verum sanguinem sed figuram quandam similitudinem be present at all in the Sacrament affirming not only that the Elements were Bread and Wine but that they were bare bread and Wine and nothing else which was the opinion of those who in the beginning of the reformation
at those who are pleased to talk as if the Fathers believed Transubstantiation Yet nevertheless they all with one mouth confessed the Body of Christ to be in the Sacrament and so do we now but in that sense which the Ancient Church meant they believed the presence of Christ spiritual Body and after a spiritual manner and that is our Faith also and we cannot be condemned for Hereticks but the old Catholick Church must lye under the Anathema too 3. This account serves for ever to break the neck of their pretences who to defend their new Doctrine of Transubstantiation and other pestilent Errors which are built upon it do stifly urge the literal and strict construction of those words this is my Body and this is my Bloud supposing that it passeth the skill of the Protestants to give a better Interpretation whereas this account gives such a fair such an Intelligible such a Rational such a Catholick explication of the thing that the Romanists themselves if they would consider it well may look upon their Construction not only a very absurd but as a very needless one too 4. This account may serve to reconcile and make up those differences which are between some Reformed Churches about this matter For whereas 't is granted by us on all hands that the Elements retain still their own Nature and Substance even after Consecration and yet the Lutheran Churches hold that Christs Real and Substantial Body is delivered together a long with the Elements methinks this should not be enough to maintain a breach if men were considerate and candid and would not insist too much upon Phrases For if by Christ real and substantial Body be meant as I believe the old Lutherans did mean the real and as they may be called in some * For the Ancients themselves used the words Nature Substance c. to this sense as is well observed by the Judicious Author of the Diallacticon commended by Lavater in his Historia Sacrament Cum agitur de Sacramentis mentionem faciunt Patres Naturae Substantiae non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hoc est non ut Philosophi naturales loquuntur sed ut homines de Divinis rebus disserentes Gratiae Virtuti Efficacitati Naturae Substantiaeque nomen impertientes nimirum Sacramenti natura id postulante Diallact .. pag. 63. Edit Anno 1557. Est autem virtus corporis Christi efficax vivifica quae per gratiam Mysticam benedictionem cum pane vino conjungitur vino conjungitur variis nominibus appeilatur quum res eadem sit Ab Augustino Corpus intelligibile invisible spirituale Ab Hieronimo Caro Divina Spiritualis Ab Irenaeo Res Caelestis Ab Ambrosio Esca Spiritualis Corpus Divini Spiritus Ab aliis aliud simile quippiam Et hoc multo etiam magis efficit ut hoc Sacramentum dignissimum sit veri Corporis Sanguinis nomenclaturâ quum non solum extrinsecus figuram imaginem ejus prae se ferat verùm etiam intus abditam lâ—â—entem naturalem ejusdem corporis proprietatem hoe est vivificam virtutem secum trahat ut ham non inanis figura aut absentis omnino rei signum existimari posset sed ipsum Corpus Domini Divinum quidem Spirituale sed presens gratia plenum virtute potens efficacitate Ibid. pag. 56. 57. sense the Substantial Virtues and Influences of Christs Body I do not see but all Reformed Churches in the World mightshake hands and be Friends as to this matter 5. This account serves to the clear meaning of several Doctors of our own who are wont to say that Christ is present in the Sacrament and received in and by the Sacrament and that really but yet Spiritually Mystically Sacramentally Effectually Virtually and the like all which expressions otherwise hard to be understood are very Intelligible if we do but take this notion along with us that the Virtues and Influences which flow from Christ are by the due use of this Sacrament actually really and effectually dispensed CHAP. XI Other Blessings which we receive by the Sacrament As the Assistance of the Holy Spirit Proved from the Words of Christ and S. Paul The Confirmation of our Faith An intimate Union with Christ What that Union is explained and Proved Lastly a Pledge of an Happy Resurrection THis then being a Fixt principle that by means of the Holy Bread and Wine we do really participate of Christs Body and Bloud divers other Blessings do necessarily follow which depend upon this as upon the Prime and Fundamental Blessing And as I have shewed already that pardon of Sin is the effect of our feeding upon Christ in a Mystical sence so I am to shew you next that there are more Blessings which accrue to us by our Communicating of Christ after that real and spiritual manner which has been explained now And the next is this that hereby we receive such large supplies and measures of Christs Spirit as are suitable to our necessities Our condition by nature is so miserable that we are not sufficient of our selves no not to think any thing that is good as of our selves therefore unless we receive supernatural aids and assistances from Heaven it is impossible for us to make our selves meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the Saints in light Without me ye can do nothing as our Saviour told his Disciples Joh. 15. 5. without the communications of his Holy Spirit 't is in vain to conceive that either we can have our fruit unto Holiness or reap in the end everlasting life For this reason he there compares himself unto a vine and us unto the branches because as the branches cannot bear fruit of themselves except they abide in the Vine so neither can we except we abide in Christ That spiritual assistance which is derived from Christ unto every particular Christian is like that vital Sap which is conveyed from the Root unto every particular Twig And by means of his vital Spirit it is that we thrive and grow and bring forth fruit unto perfection Hence Christ is called our Life because he is the Authour of that quickning Principle whereby we live unto righteousness and from Him it is that the whole Body of the Church by joynts and bands having nourishment ministred and being knit together increaseth with the increase of God Col. 2. 19. Now this Heavenly assistance this quickning Principle this Divine Nutriment is given to every Soul by the Mysterious and Gracious Energy of the Spirit and by the due celebration of the Eucharist the assistances of the Spirit are the more plentiful and his Irrigations are the more abundant a dew is then increased into a showre and every thirsty Communicant is largely refresht with distillations from above as the parched ground in Summer is refresht with Rain This appears two ways first because as hath been proved by this Blessed Mystery we are
to mean purposes but his office is by kindly and gracious operations to renew mens minds and to bring their hearts still more and more to such a temper and frame as is suitable to the Laws of the Gospel So that our drinking of the Spirit at the Holy Communion must necessary have this effect that those good things are establisht which were wrought in us before by the Spirits Energy Noâ— is this any more than what Devout Communicants find to be true by their own experience their minds are then fixt upon things of Heaven their sense of Christs Love is then strong their affections to him are then warm their hope in him is then lively and comfortable their Charity to others is then great and their whole Soul is full of the most ravishing Pleasures so that were men careful not to stifle or resist the Spirit but to keep themselves so well disposed all their time as they are when they go from the Lords Table it would be impossible either for their salvation to be insecure or for their minds to be uneasie And yet Faustus Socinus will by no means allow our Faith to be at all Confirm'd by the use of the Lords Supper He looks upon that Holy Rite as a work of our own as he is pleas'd to call it as an ordinary thing that we do among one another in Commemoration of the Lords Death but not as a Mystery whereby we receive any benefit any advantage from God But though the Heretick be so admired as a great man of sense and reason yet he trifles altogether and talks Impertinently and Idly upon this as he doth Sophistically upon the Rest of his own notions For why doth not the celebration of this Mystery confirm our Faith Why saith Socinus the distribution of the bread and wine cannot do it because they are mean things which testifie Nec enim panis ille fractus a nobis comestus vinumque in poculum infusum a nobis epotum oftendunt nobis aut suadent vere Christi Corpus pro nobis fractum fuisse c. Socin de usu S. Caen. nothing which shew no reasons for our Faith nor contain any thing that perswadeth us to believe that Christs Body was Broken or that his Bloud was shed for us Now the Heretick and his followers in this argument do first mistake the Question for we do not say that the bare distribution of the Elements is the thing which serveth to help and strengthen our faith but that this is done by the whole action Now the whole Action containeth Prayers and praises a rehearsal of the Institution and a declaration of Christs Passion as well as a division of the Creatures of Bread and Wine All these things come under the Notion of the Eucharist and each of them ministreth to the confirmation of our faith especially since they all concur in the same Action because they were appointed by Christ himself to be done in Commemoration of his death and consequently do suppose and argue that he died indeed 2. So that Secondly these men are false and deceitful in this their way of reasoning that the Sacrament is no Proof of our Lords Passion For 1. St. Paul saith plainly that as often as we eat this Bread and drink this Cup we do shew forth the Lords Death 1 Cor. Nec oftendunt nobis aut suadent c ubi supr 11. 26. which in express terms contradicteth the Doctrine of Socinus This is an outward Testimony for my faith to rely up on 2. The Holy Spirit is given as hath Nonne ad credendum Evangelio Spiritus sancti interiore dono opus est Non Catech Sect. 6. cap. 6. been proved with the Bread and Wine and by his secret operation I am perswaded to believe the Article of Christs Passion to be true That 's an inward Confirmation of my Faith though I suppose the Socinians may not value that because they allow not Faith to be the effect of the Spirits operation 3. Considering that this Ordinance was instituted by Christ himself as a memorial of his death and that he hath appointed us the use of it for that reason and upon that account this is evidence and proof enough to convince me that he suffered and died of a truth The Divine institution and command together with the meaning End and Design of it this is that which we ought Quid insulsius quam si quis ita argumentaretur nos panem istum frangimus comedimus idque ut praedicemus Christum corpus Sanguinem suum pro nobis tradidisse Igi ur verum est ita Christum fecisse Socin in Append ad scriptum de Caena Dom. particularly and carefully to regard and then if I argue thus we eat Bread and drink Wine by the Divine appointment and institution that we may declare that Christ gave his Body and blood for us and therefore it is very true that Christ did so this is no absurd argumentation as that wicked Impostor had the confidence to say it is rather a very rational and clear way of reasoning for why should I believe that Christ would command me to commemorate that which is an untruth It is a plain argument that Christ did dye because he hath required us to Celebrate this Mystery in memory of his Passion and consequently it is true that the Celebration of this mystery is for the confirmation of our faith The meaning and signification of this Mystery is the thing which we are principally to consider and to illustrate this matter briefly by two familiar instances let us consider that common Phaenomenon in the air which we call the Rainbow If you ask a Philosopher about it he will tell you that t is nothing but a Meteor the Natural effect of such and such Natural causes but the Christian will tell you that it is a Token of that promise which God made of old unto Noah and therefore when we see the Rainbow we may assuredly believe that tho the World was once drowned with a Flood it shall never be destroyed by Waters again Thus the signification and meaning of that thing is for the Confirmation of our Faith tho' there be not groundse nough for this perswasion from the Nature of the thing it self 2. Again let us consider that ancient Mystery the Passeover Supper the eating of a Lamb with bitter Herbs to the ignorant Pagan might seem but an Ordinary meal or perhaps a silly because unpleasant Ceremony but to the Jews it was a Rite of great signification because it was a memorial of Gods Mercy to their Fathers in delivering them out of Egypt and therefore God commanded even their Posterity to keep it with all diligence and solemnity Now let me ask the Socinian was not this memorial thus instituted thus appointed sufficient grounds for all the Jews in after-ages to believe that the History of that deliverance was true Nay are not all the Jews in the
but remained perfectly United to it by a Substantial Conjunction and by reason of that Conjunction it was restored to life after so many hours In like manner when we give up the Ghost the Body parteth with the Soul and during this state hath no manner of sensation or Motion having lost the Natural Principle of Both but yet it is not separated from Christ though it Corrupteth in the Grave while its Mate is in the enjoyment of Bliss yet it is still United to its Lord by a Mystical Conjunction and by reason of that Union it shall be reunited to the soul in Gods good time that Both may have their Partnership in the fruition of an endless Life 3. This consideration were it duely weighed would be of very great Use and Comfort to good men when they are going out of this world But there is besides a third thing to be considered viz. that as we are united to Christ so Christs Nature is also communicated to Us by means of this Sacrament which doth further conclude an Assurance of an Happy Resurrection This Nature thus communicated is as it were a Spark of the Divine Nature which gives the Body a Disposition and Aptitude to Rise again like that Vital Principle in wheat that makes it Apt to spring out of the earth again when 't is committed to the ground though it hath been laid up a long time in the Granary S. Cyril calls Christs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cyril where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a living Body and so corpus vitae in some of the Latines as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a Glorious Body Phil. 3. 21. Living Body meaning the Virtue of it or his Spiritual Body the Quickning Seed that is in us For Christ by Divine Influences from his body giveth vitality to our mortal Bodies by that vivifick Virtue which is communicated by the Bread it entreth into the bodies of the Faithful though it be Substantially absent And hence he argues that if the dead in our Saviours time were raised to Life onely by being touched with his Holy Body out of which there went Virtue certainly the vital 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Cyril in Joan. lib. 4. cap. 14. Blessing must be much more abundant which we receive who even Taste and Communicate of it because it transforms Communicants into its own Blessed Condition that is into Immortality In like manner Ireneus proved the Certainty of a Resurrection from the Virtue and efficacy of this Sacrament supposing it a thing very Unreasonable to deny that Flesh to be capable of Incorruption which is nourished with This is plainly the meaning and force of those words of Irenaeus Quomodo dicunt Haeretici carnem in corruptionem scilicet finalem devenire non percipere vitam quae a corpore Domini sanguine alitur Quemadmodum qui est e terra panis percipiens invocationem Dei jam non communis panis est sed Eucharistia ex duabus rebas constans terrena caelisti sic corpora nostra percipientia Eucharistiam jam non sunt corruptibilia spem Resurrectionis habentia Adv. Haeres lib. 4. cap. 34. Quando mixtus calix fractus panis percipit verbum Dei fit Eucharistia sanguinis corporis Christi ex quibus augetur consistit carnis nostrae substantia quomodo negant carnem capacem esse donationis Dei quae est vita aeterna quae sanguine corpore Christi nutritur membrum ejus est Id. lib. 5. cap. 2. that Bread which carrieth with it the vital Virtues of the Flesh of our Lord because those Virtues turn to the advantage of that Body as well as of the soul by reason that our Flesh being United to the Flesh of Christ by the Spirit is by the Eucharist Prepared and Disposed for and made capable of the gift of God which is eternal Life But to conclude this point besides these arguments drawn from the Reason of the thing it self and from the sense and suffrage of Antiquity our Saviours own words are abundantly demonstrative of this matter in S. Jo. 6. The bread of God is be with cometh down from heaven and giveth Life unto the world I am that bread of Life Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness and are dead this is the bread which cometh down from Heaven that a man may eat thereof and not dye for ever I am the Living bread which came down from heaven if any man eat of this bread he shall Live for ever and the bread that I will give is my Flesh which I will give for the Life of the world Who so eateth my Flesh and drinketh my bloud hath eternal Life and I will raise him up at the last day for my Flesh is meat indeed and my bloud is drink indeed As the living Father hath sent me and I live by the Father so he that eateth me even he shall live by me These words are so plain that they need no Explication if by eating the Bread the Meat the Flesh here spoken of we understand not of Believing the Doctrines of Christianity as some most Absurdly imagine nor of eating the very Substance of Christs Body as others most Ridiculously conceive but our partaking and communicating of the Virtues of his Flesh and Bloud which is the genuine and Catholick construction Now by a right use of this Holy Sacrament we do this effectually and consequently may be assured that as we are blest with the Spirit and Life and Communion of Christ in this world by so doing so we have an undoubted Title to a Life of Glory and Immortality in the next CHAP. XII Two Practical Conclusions from the Whole Discourse I Have now done with the Speculative or Doctrinal part of this Subject having after a plain Didactical manner delivered and asserted the true Catholick Faith concerning this Sacrament and from the consideration of those blessings which it brings with it I shall briefly draw these following Inferences and so conclude the whole matter 1. That we are not to rate this Mystery according to its Face and Outward Appearance nor judge of its efficacy and Dignity by the Elements For though our Senses do infallibly assure us that it is Bread and Wine yet our Faith ought to assure us too that it is not Common bread or Bare Wine but something more By the word and Prayer and by the Secret but effectual operation of the Holy Ghost there is besides the Natural and true Substance of the materials an Addition of Grace which is chrefly und principally to be considered by us And this is that Change of the Elements which the Catholick Church ever did believe meaning not a change of their Nature but of their Use of their Quality of their Condition As when we say such a man is turned a Christian or such a Christian is turned a Minister or such a Fabrick is turned into a Church our meaning is not that
there is a Substantial but an Accidental So Philo saith of Cajus Caesar when he changed the Temple of God at Jerusalem into a Temple bearing his own Name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Philo. lib. de legatione noted by Eusebius Eccles Hist 2. cap. 6. mutation an alternation of the state Condition and Quality of the man or the thing but not of the Substance or Nature for the Convert is a man still but something more that is a Servant of Christ and the Minister is a Christian man still but something more that is an Ambassadour of the Gospel and the Fabrick is an House still but something more that is the House of God In like manner when St. Chrysostome and the rest of the Ancients 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost in Prodit Judae Tom. 5. p. 559. say that upon repeating the words of Institution the things which lye before us on the Holy Table are Changed the meaning clearly is not that their Nature or Substance is Destroyed but that the Condition of them is altered so that they are Bread and Wine still but something more that is they are now become Sacraments the vehicles of Grace the means and Instruments whereby the Spiritual Body and Bloud of Christ are conveyed and communicated to us Upon this account when we go to the Holy Communion we should think we go as indeed we do to an Ordinance of the greatest Consideration and Consequence we should value it highly for that Divine stamp which the Holy Jesus hath set upon it we should prize it according to the Purport and Ends for which it was first instituted and we should regard not so much the things themselves which we eat and drink as the Institution of the thing together with the Power and Blessing of God which doth attend it Men that do not look into the Inside of this heavenly Mystery but judge according to Appearance are apt to entertain mean and low thoughts of it because they see none but a weak and Sinful man that Ministreth and nothing but the Common Creatures of Bread and Wine that are distributed But when we present our selves before the Lords Table we should Lift up our Hearts and Raise our Thoughts above those things which are obvious to the Sense we should bear in our Hence that very Ancient Admonition extant in S. Cyprian de Orat. Dom. and in divers Ancient Liturgies Sursum corda Lift up your hearts minds the Truth the Goodness and the Power of God and consider that it is the Usual method of his Providence to bring the Greatest Ends about by the use of such means as to our thinking are the most Unlikely and incompetent for those purposes Thus it was as to his choice of Persons in the beginning of Christianity he employed such men for the great work of the Ministry as in the esteem of the world were of the least and Meanest consideration One a Publican another a Tent-maker many that were Fishermen few that were Learned none that were Noble or that bore a great Figure in the world and yet by these weak these contemptible Instruments I mean weak in themselves and Contemptible in the account of others by these instruments were Philosophers Princes Kingdomes and infinite numbers of Jews and Idolaters Captivated and brought in obedience to the Faith of the Son of God we have this Treasure of the Gospel in Earthen vessels that the Excellency of the Power may be of God and not of Us saith the Apostle 2. Cor. 4. 7. Thus it hath been Gods method too as to his choice of things He hath been wont to use the most Ordinary the most Contemptible means to effect his purposes of Grace and Mercy that he might shew the greatness of his own Power and convince the world that nothing is so mean but that it shall be serviceable and effective of Noble ends as long as it is the hand of an Almighty Agent What was Circumcision that it should be the Seal of Abrahams Righteousness and a sure Token of Gods Covenant with him and his whole Issue what was the noise of a few Rams-horns that it should tumble down the walls of Jericho or a Cake of barly bread that it should be seen to overturn the Tents of the Midianites or a Brasen Serpent that the sight of it should cure the wounds of the Israelites or a little lump of Figs that it should presently heal Hezekiah what was a manger that it should be the Cradle of the Lord of Glory or a Cross that it should be the Altar for the great Propitiatory Sacrifice to be offered up upon it what was St. Peters Shadow that it should restore the sick and cast Unclean Spirits out of their Holds and Possessions nay what is a little Water that it should Cleanse and Sanctifie all our souls and make Baptized persons the Vessels of Election And yet S. Paul calls it the Washing of Regeneration Tit. 3. 5. And the operations of Christs Spirit are so effectual by Baptisme that to every Faithful man it becomes the instrument of Salvation And why should it be thought a thing incredible that God should bless the use of the Bread and Wine or make it productive of those Spiritual Benefits which have been afore-mentioned Our Faith ought not to stumble at this we should not look upon the Elements but upon the Institution not take an estimate of this Ordinance by the Creatures we receive but by the Divine Benediction that cometh down upon them For when Christ Blessed the Bread and the Cup and commanded the use of them he intended that this Mystery should ever be successful and effectual to every Soul that should be rightly Disposed 'T is S. Chrysostoms observation S. Chrys ubi Supr that when God blessed his Creatures in the beginning and commanded them to be Fruitful and Multiply that word though it was given so long ago yet 't is powerfull still and will be powerful to the worlds end and by Virtue thereof the least grain of mustard seed groweth up to a great plant In like manner that Blessing wherewith the Son of God blessed the bread and Wine at the Institution of this Solemnity ceaseth not now but is as effectual as ever so that they are still the Instruments of Our growth in Grace as they were to the Disciples in the beginning not indeed by any Natural Causality that is in them but by the good Pleasure and Blessing of God and by the Operation of the Holy Ghost For the workings of the Spirit though they be Mysterious and Secret yet are they certain and True and at this Heavenly Solemnity the work of the Spirit is done So that we must draw our minds off from the things which are below which are before us which we see and taste of and Fix our thoughts upon the Spiritual Body and Bloud of Christ which are as it were wrapped up in them and as the Ancients were wont to admonish we
should prepare not so much the Mouth as the Heart And this is the true reason of those Rhetorical Expressions of some of the Fathers S. Chrysostomes especially where they seem to speak as if it were not Bread and Wine but something of a more Noble and Excellent nature that we Communicate of Such forms of speech were not Pure Negatives but Negatives by Comparison as hath been admirably well proved and explained by the Learned Archbishop Cranmer in several the like instances both in the old and New Testament It is not Bread and Wine that is it is not so much the Bread and Wine as the Body and Bloud of Christ which is to be considered The Elements are nothing at all in Comparison of that which they do Represent Exhibite and bring to us And the design Defence pag. 36. of those Fathers was to draw our minds upwards to Heaven that we should not regard so much the Bread the Wine the Priest and the Natural Body of Christ as we should consider his Divinity and Holy Spirit given unto us to our Eternal salvation That we should not fix our thoughts and minds upon the things themselves before us but lift up our hearts higher unto Christs Spirit and Divinity without which his Body availeth not as he said himself it is the Spirit that giveth life the Flesh profiteth nothing The Arch-Bishop is very copious upon this and I shall transcribe his words the rather because the passage is very useful and the Book is not very common This form of speech saith he is Negatives by compason commonly used not only in the Scripture and among all good Authors but also in all manner of Languages For when two things be compared together in the extolling of the more excellent or abasing of the more vile is many times used a Negative by comparison which nevertheless is no pure Negative but only in the respect of the more excellent or the more base As by example When the people rejecting the Prophet 1 Reg. 8. Samuel desired to have a King almighty God said to Samuel They have not rejected thee but me Not meaning by this Negative absolutely that they had not rejected Samuel in whose place they desired to have a King but by that one Negative by comparison he understood two affirmatives that is to say that they had rejected Samuel and not him alone but also that they had chiefly rejected God And when the Prophet David Psal 22. said in the person of Christ I am a Worm and not a Man By this Negative he denied not utterly that Christ was a man but the more vehemently to express the great humiliation of Christ he said that he was not abased only to the Nature of Man but was brought so low that he might rather be called a Worm than a man This manner of speech was familiar and usual to St. Paul as when he said It is Rom. 7. not I that do it but it is the sin that dwelleth in me And in an other place he saith Christ sent me not to baptise but 1. Cor. 1. to preach the Gospel And again he saith My speech and preaching was not in words 1 Cor. 1. of mans perswasion but in manifest declaration of the Spirit and power And he saith also Neither he that grafteth nor he 1 Cor. 3. that watereth is any thing but God that giveth the increase And he saith moreover It is not I that live but Christ liveth Gal. 2. within me And God forbid that I should Gal. 6. rejoyce in any thing but in the Cross of our Lord Jesu Christ And further we do not Ephe. 6. wrestle against flesh and blood but against he Spirits of Darkness In all these sentences and many other like although they be Negatives nevertheless St. Paul meant not clearly to deny that he did that evil whereof he spake or utterly to say that he was not sent to Baptize who indeed did Baptize at certain times and was sent to do all things that pertained to salvation or that in his office of setting forth Gods word he used no witty perswasions which indeed he used most discreetly or that the grafter and waterer be nothing which be Gods Creatures made to his similitude and without whose work there should be no increase or to say that he was not alive who both lived and ran thro' all Countries to set forth Gods Glory or clearly to affirm that he gloried and rejoyced in no other thing than in Christs Cross who rejoyced with all men that were in joy and sorrowed with all that were in sorrow or to deny utterly that we wrestle against flesh and blood which cease not daily to wrestle and War against our Enemies the world the flesh and the Devil In all these sentences St. Paul as I said meant not clearly to deny these things which undoubtedly were all true but he meant that in comparison of other greater things these smaller were not much to be esteemed but that the greater things were the chief things to be considered As that sin committed by his infirmity was rather to be imputed to original sin or corruption of Nature which lay lurking within him than to his own will and consent And that although he was sent to Baptize yet he was chiefly sent to preach Gods word And that although he used wise and discreet perswasions therein yet the success thereof came principally of the power of God and of the working of the Holy Spirit And that although the Grafter and Waterer of the Garden be some things and do not a little in their Offices yet it is God chiefly that giveth the increase And that although he lived in this world yet his chief life concerning God was by Christ whom he had living within him And that although he gloried in many other things yea in his own infirmities yet his greatest joy was in the Redemption by the Cross of Christ And that although our spirit daily fighteth against our flesh yet our chief and principal fight is against our ghostly enemies the subtil and puissant wicked Spirits and Devils The same manner of speech used also St. Peter in his first Epistle saying that the apparel Pet. 3. of Women should not be outwardly with broidred Hair and setting on of Gold nor in puting on of gorgious apparel but that the inward man of the heart should be without corruption In which manner of speech he intended not utterly to forbid all broidering of Hair all gold and costly apparel to all Women For every one must be apparelled according to their condition state and degree but he meant hereby clearly to condemn all pride and excess in apparel and to move all Women that they should study to deck their Souls inwardly with all virtues and not to be curious outwardly to deck and adorn their bodies with sumptuous apparel And our Saviour Christ himself was full of such manner of speeches Gather
not Mat. 6. unto you saith he treasure upon Earth willing us thereby rather to set our minds upon Heavenly treasure which ever endureth than upon Earthly treasure which by many sundry occasions perisheth and is taken away from us And yet worldly treasure must needs be had and possessed of some men as the person time and occasion doth serve Likewise Mat. 10. he said When you be brought before Kings and Princes think not what and how you shall answer Not willing us by this Negative that we should negligently and unadvisedly answer we care not what but that we should depend of our Heavenly Father trusting that by his Holy Spirit he will sufficiently instruct us of answer rather than to trust of any answer to be devised by our Wit and study And in the same manner he spake when he said It is not you that speak but it is the Spirit Mat. 10. of God that speaketh within you For the Spirit of God is he that principally putteth godly words into our mouths and yet nevertheless we do speak according to his moving And to be short in all these sentences following that is to say Call no Man your Father upon Earth Let Mat. 23. no Man call you Lord or Master Fear not Mat. 23. them that kill the Body I came not to send Mat. 10. peace upon Earth It is not in me to set Mat. 10. you at my right hand or left hand You shall Mat. 20. not worship the Father neither in this Mount Joh. 4. nor in Jerusalem I take no witness at no Joan. 5. Man My Doctrine is not mine I seek John 7. not mine I seek not my glory In all John 8. these Negatives our Saviour Christ spake not precisely and utterly to deny all the foresaid things but in comparison of them to prefer other things as to prefer our Father and Lord in Heaven above any worldly Father Lord or Master in Earth and his fear above the fear of any Creature and his word and Gospel above all worldly peace Also to prefer spiritual and inward honouring of God in pure heart and mind above local corporal and outward honour and that Christ preferred his Fathers glory above his own Now forasmuch as I have declared at length the Nature and kind of these Negative speeches which be no pure Negatives but by comparison it is easie hereby to make answer to St. John Chrysostome who used this phrase of speech most of any Author For his meaning in his foresaid homily was not that in the Celebration of the Lords Supper is neither Bread nor Wine neither Priest nor the Body of Chist which the Papists themselves must needs confess but his intent was to draw our minds upwards to Heaven that we should not consider so much the Bread Wine Priest and Body of Christ as we should consider his Divinity and Holy Spirit given unto us to our eternal Salvation And therefore in the same place he useth so many times these words think and think not Willing us by those words that we should not fix our thoughts and minds up the bread Wine Priest nor Christs body But to lift up our hearts higher unto his Spirit and Divinity without the which his Body availeth nothing as he said himself It is the spirit that giveth life the Flesh availeth Joan. 6. nothing Thus far he Therefore when you address your selves to the Table of the great God you should be full of lofty and Divine apprehensions of that hidden Treasure of Celestial Grace and Virtue which is then to be tendred unto you how mean soever the Instruments of that Grace are in their own Nature And accordingly you should go with those Holy dispositions and affections with that Reverence dread and awe of God but withal with that forwardness and swiftness of Devotion and with those transports of pleasure and joy as if you were now going to the very gate of Heaven Men should be afraid to use this important and venerable Ordinance with respect to secular and base ends only to satisfie the Laws of the Realm to save their Places their Reputation their mammon It is a most fearful act of presumption a deadly and horrid prophanation an argument of Atheistical or debaucht minds when men dare prostitute a thing of such a sacred Nature to their carnal Lusts and take the Viands of Eternity into their hands and mouths even when the Devil is in their hearts When you prepare for this solemn occasion be in good earnest with God and with your own Souls be as considerate and serious as if you were going to die be as upright in heart as if you were to take the next step to judgment When you see the Holy Table spread call home your thoughts let your minds be as composed and your Meditations be as full of Reverence as if you saw a vision and beheld the food of Angels let down from Heaven in a Sheet when the happy hour is now come that God waits to bless you with the greatest Treasure of his love begrudge not the going to his Table for it but bless God that you may have it for fetching and when you go be as pure in heart as if your lips were touched with a live Coal from off the Altar prostrate your bodies and cast your Souls down to the lowest step of humility and adore the Almighty like those Seraphims in Isaiahs Vision who covered their feet and their Faces with their wings as they cried one unto another Holy Holy Holy is the Lord of Hosts the whole Earth is full of his Glory Isa 6. 2 3. When the Bread and Wine are made Sacraments and those blessed Symbols of Grace are reached out unto you think and know that the Lord of Life and Glory is now coming under your roof and great is the Peace of such as receive him with the passionate desires of affectionate Penitents that bathe his feet with their Tears and lodge him in the retirements of a clean innocent and Virgin heart And when you depart let it be with Thanksgivings and Hallelujahs and with all the expressions of grateful Souls enflamed with the Love of Jesus and with a deep sense of your Honour and Felicity that God hath vouchsafed thus to visit you with his goodness that he hath taken you into his Arms that he hath covered your offences that he hath fed you with the true Bread of Life from Heaven that he hath shed his love abroad in your hearts by the Holy Ghost which is now given unto you that he hath united you to himself by the Communication of the Divine Nature that he hath cast into you the seed of immortality and given you an earnest of a blessed Resurrection and an antepast of Heaven for all these blessings you receive at the hand of God as oft as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup of the Lord after a worthy manner and as it becometh Saints